Unlawfully changing the word Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4
- ASADA resorted to tabling a forged certificate analysis document to make its false case that Alavi imported Thymosin Beta-4 from China.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 “A copy of the certificate of analysis in relation to the Thymosin Beta-4 is annexed to this statement and marked ‘NAM-10’.”
My comment: Under the heading, Day 2 forged documents, at pages 173-176, the players’ QC Mr Clelland said: ”We have been trying to take the panel to some material which shows the dangers, if not the folly, of placing reliance on a number of witnesses … in relation to documents created by them, documents which on their face one would look and, as I say, have an initial reaction which would be, well, that looks like a document that one could trust and, on further investigation we say they are agreed by everybody to be a forgery (my emphasis) or there’s something else unreliable … Mr Alavi told the Australian in that newspaper article that he thought that he was having words put into his mouth by WADA and ASADA and that they were trying to trap him into saying that it was Thymosin Beta-4, even though, to quote him: ‘he made it very clear repeatedly he didn’t know what it was.’
“If there is any doubt as to the disabilities and concerns about these witnesses, could we ask the panel to turn to page 142 of the appendices to the panel brief. It starts at paragraph 567. Part 7, ‘Assessing the credibility of Charter, Alavi and Dank.’.” I would even go so far to say a litany of matters that are in effect acknowledged by WADA as being untruths, evidence of falsification of documents, contradictory statements, matters that are said obviously go to the credibility and reliability of each of those three witnesses.”
It was agreed that the forged document was typed by Alavi’s agent in Shanghai. The agent even forgot to include batch numbers on his creation. - Staffer 7 has implied that each time Essendon sports scientist Stephen
Dank mentioned Thymosin, he was hiding the fact that he knew that Thymosin Beta-4 by name was a prohibited substance before 10:34:17 AM on 4 February 2013.
Interim Report 23 August 2011 (page 18, line 1)
“Dank sent Robinson a reminder by SMS:
‘Don’t forget how important Thymosin is. This is going to be our vital cornerstone next year. It is the ultimate assembly regulatory protein and biological modifier.‘
“Thymosin Beta-4 is a WADA prohibited S2 Category peptide.”
My comment Staffer 7 was falsely implying that Thymosin and Thymosin were the same substance. As no one in the world could ascertain that Thymosin Beta-4 was a prohibited substance by name, before 10:34:17 AM on 4 February 2013, there was no reason why Dank would need to sinisterly use the word Thymosin instead of Thymosin Beta-4. Furthermore, if Thymosin was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4, as claimed by Staffer 7, why did he tamper with the evidence by changing Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4 on over 50 occasions?
During his interviews, Alavi stated that he received his first delivery of substances at 3:30 PM on 28 December 2011. - Staffer 7 falsely claimed Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4.
Interim Report, 31 January 2012 (page 27): “Como [Compounding Pharmacy] sent Essendon FC an invoice for various substances including ‘Hexarelin’ and ‘Peptide Thymosin’. The invoice recorded that on 10 January 2012 Essendon was supplied 14 vials of Hexarelin with a further 7 vials supplied on 18 January 2012 in conjunction with 26 vials of ‘Peptide Thymosin’ believed to be Thymosin Beta-4. However, on a subsequent invoice dated 29 February 2012, both the Hexarelin and ‘Peptide Thymosin’ costs were re-credited to the Club and did not form part of the final amount ultimately paid by Essendon, under the authority of Hamilton sometime after 11 April 2012.”
My comment Clearly, Staffer 7 was leading the witness with a false statement. Staffer 7 had no basis on which to state “Peptide Thymosin believed to be Thymosin Beta-4”. The parcel sent from China was labelled Thymosin and was never tested. Como Compounding Pharmacy re-credited the cost because the substances were fried and couldn’t be used. - Staffer 7 falsely claimed that Thymosin Beta-4 was procured from China.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 253 & 254)
Transcript
Staffer 7: “No. Okay. So, if I can give you that context now, that’s Steven Dank is asking Shane Charter for Thymosin Beta 4, and Shane Charter is asking you to compound the Thymosin. He’s not stipulating whether it’s Alpha or Beta 4.”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
Staffer 7: “But given the context I’ve given you before, and given the fact that only Beta 4 was procured from China.”
My comment Staffer 7’s claim that ‘only Beta-4 was procured from China was untrue. He knew the package from China was labelled Thymosin. He knew that the substance was never analysed.
Staffer 7 was leading the witness through referring to the context that he had previously described to Alavi. Staffer 7 was supposed to be collecting Alavi’s understanding of what transpired, not telling him what he (Staffer 7) falsely claimed had occurred.
To highlight the fact that it was impossible to rely on what may have been ordered and the label on a vial, one only needs to refer to the Belgian cyclist Wim Vans Evenant case. He was charged with importing TB-500 into Belgium but when the vials labelled ‘TB-500’ were analysed, they didn’t contain TB-500. Clearly, it was a salutary lesson that irrespective of what is on the label, unless the substance is analysed, no one can say what it is.
- Alavi initially capitulated to Staffer 7 leading the witness but then contradicted himself.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 254, line 10)
Transcript
Alavi: “Yeah. You’re going to see them as Beta 4.”
My comment This is a perfect example of Alavi capitulating to Staffer 7 leading the witness. Alavi repeatedly said at this time that he had never heard of peptides; that he didn’t know anything about thymosin and didn’t know there were different varieties of thymosin; that you couldn’t trust anything from China; and as he had never had the ‘thymosin’ tested, he didn’t know what it was. But here, having been lied to by Staffer 7, Alavi is saying “yeah” to Staffer 7. Source: Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 259, line 26): - Alavi initially agreed with the position outlined by Staffer 7 but then recanted and withdrew his agreement.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 259, line 26):
Staffer 7: “Well, okay. If I put to side whether you can recall signing it, looking at the content of what’s said in there, do you agree with the content [of the letter]?”
Alavi: “No, No, because I don’t know whether it’s Thymomodulin.”
Staffer 7: “Thymosin Alpha or Thymosin Beta 4.”
Alavi: “Yeah. I don t know which one it is. So, I’d have to be mad to sign this.”
My comment Nothing could be clearer. Alavi contradicted his earlier comment “Yeah. You’re going to see them as Beta-4,” when he said: “I don’t know which one [Thymosin Alpha or Thymosin Beta-4] it is.” - Staffer 7 led the witness by opining that as Alavi didn’t have any Thymosin Alpha, it [the raw material labelled Thymosin] must be Thymosin Beta-4.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 254, line 12):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Yeah.”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
Staffer 7: “Because you don’t have any Thymosin Alpha.”
Staffer 7: “So, is it fair that – would you agree then that it’s Thymosin Beta 4 that your reference to Thymosin?”
Alavi: “Yes. Yeah, I guess. I mean, I can’t be 100 per cent (my emphasis) because I don’t have the testing in front of me. But it’s unlikely to be the Alpha because of, you know, the invoices and everything else.”
My comment As no substance had been tested, Staffer 7 had no idea whether Alavi had Thymosin Alpha. Staffer 7 was leading the witness. Although, he continued to put words in Alavi’s mouth, Alavi said he wasn’t 100 per cent certain because in his words he didn’t “have the testing in front of him”. Staffer 7 had clearly confused Alavi into capitulation because Alavi had forgotten that he never had the substance tested because Eagle Analytical Service’s quote was excessive.
Further proof of Alavi having been manipulated by Staffer 7 is found in Alavi’s mention of the invoices. On a number of occasions Alavi stated that all the invoices contained the word thymosin. Thymosin Beta-4 never appeared on a single invoice. Clearly, Alavi was confused and had no idea what he was saying when he was tentatively agreeing with Staffer 7. (Source: Alavi’s 26 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 – Staffer 7 page 47): “Similarly, in the invoices obtained from Mr Alavi, which pertain to Mr Dank (personally), there is no reference to any Thymosin being supplied to him as a customer in the 2011 and 2012 calendar years.” - Charter emailed Alavi a document that was a fraudulent attempt by the manufacturer of TB-500 to convince the prospective buyer that TB-500 was the same substance as the better known Thymosin Beta-4.
Alavi’s interview 29 November 2013 with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 259):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Yeah. Now, on the 12 January, Mr Charter has emailed a document to Mr Dank and you which described how to use TB-500 Thymosin Beta 4. And the document seems to be describing the optimum means by which to prepare, administer and store Thymosin Beta 4.”
My comment: As ASADA was the anti-doping authority and employed science experts, Staffer 7 knew, or should have known, that the document Charter emailed Alavi was a fraudulent attempt by the manufacturer of TB-500 to convince the prospective buyer that TB-500 was the same substance as the better known Thymosin Beta-4.
The document was fraudulent. It was a lie. TB-500 is not the same product as Thymosin Beta-4. During the Court of Arbitration for Sport hearing, WADA’s key witness Professor Handelsman testified that TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 were different products (Source: CAS transcript, day 2, page 189, line 38). TB-500 contains seven amino acids and Thymosin Beta-4 contains 43 amino acids in a specific sequence. Therefore, it was wrong for Staffer 7 or anybody else, including a manufacturer to attribute the protocols for TB-500 to Thymosin Beta-4. - Alavi continually capitulated to Staffer 7 by responding with “yeah” or “yep” answers to unsubstantiated leading the evidence statements by Staffer 7.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 255):
Alavi: “Yep, yep, yep.”
My comment: Although Alavi has said “yep”, at the time, he knew nothing about peptides so wasn’t in a position to offer an opinion about TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4. Furthermore, as pointed out in clause 172 above, Alavi was factually wrong about TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 being the same substance. - Staffer 7 manipulated the witness (Alavi) by falsely claiming that there was compelling evidence that the substance was Thymosin Beta-4
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 255, line 3):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “So if I add that into the mix there”
Alavi: “So, you can assume that’s Beta 4?”
Staffer 7: “Well, can we take it further than assume? Do you think it’s fairly compelling now that it’s Thymosin Beta 4?”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
My comment: Staffer 7’s manipulation of Alavi had moved him from “I didn’t test it, so, I don’t know what it is,” to now assuming it was Thymosin Beta-4. But that wasn’t enough for Staffer 7. He then turned from the investigator to an expert witness/prosecutor and told Alavi it was “compelling evidence”. - Staffer 7 manipulated the witness by changing the word Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4
Alavi’s 11 December 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Matt Sheens (Page 11):
Transcript
Staffer 7: [referring to 28 December 2011 delivery which were compounded into clear vials] “So, both the Hexarelin and Thymosin – Thymosin Beta-4 (my emphasis) were in clear vials?”
Alavi: “Clear vials, correct.”
My comment: Staffer 7 has planted evidence by changing ‘Thymosin’ to ‘Thymosin Beta-4’. Furthermore, as the Thymosin wasn’t tested, no one, including Staffer 7, Alavi, Dank and the CAS panel, knew whether the substance labelled Thymosin was Thymosin Alpha-1 or Thymomodulin or Thymosin Beta-4 or Thymosin Beta-10 or Thymosin Beta-15 or an unnamed substance. Furthermore, the substance was fried, and thrown out, when exposed to the light. Clearly, whatever substance came from China no longer existed after it was fried and thrown out. - Alavi not only provided irrefutable evidence that he didn’t know what the substance was but also debunked Staffer 7’s claim that the Belgian cyclist’s arrest was the trigger for Staffer 7 wanting Alavi’s signature.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 259 line 26):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Well, okay. If I put to side whether you can recall signing it, looking at the content of what’s said in there, do you agree with the content [of the letter]?”
Alavi: “No. No, because I don’t know whether it’s Thymomodulin.”
Staffer 7: “Thymosin Alpha or Thymosin Beta 4”
Alavi: “Yeah. I don t know which one it is. So, I’d have to be mad to sign this.”
Staffer 7: “And what about the backdating of it, the February date and he’s sending this to you in June?”
Alavi: “Yeah. Well, he’s – he was asking me to sign this pretty much since February.”
My comment Nothing could be clearer. Alavi said: “I don’t know which one [Thymosin Alpha or Thymosin Beta-4] it is.”
Staffer 7 was planting false evidence through omission. Dank initially asked Alavi to sign the February dated letter on 27 February. It was not a back-dated letter when it was written and sent. - Alavi and SIA confirmed that there were no dispensing records indicating that Dank received Thymosin Beta-4 from Alavi
Alavi’s 19 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 17, line 1:
Transcript
Alavi: “There’s no other documents, but I’ll comment on a few of these requests for specified documents or things. It’s fairly easy for me to go through my computer system — my dispensing system — and have a look for names to see whether or not anything has been dispensed to them. So, I did that very quickly last night, and the names that are in schedule 1, are under the fourth request: not Essendon Football Club, not Stephen Dank not Dean Robinson, not Shane Charter.”
My comment Alavi’s records indicated that 15 vials of Thymosin that arrived on Alavi’s doorstep on 18 February 2012 were never ordered and never paid for. (see clause 13 in Executive Summary). Eighty-three (83) days later, on 11 May 2012, Alavi’s lab assistant Vania Giordani told Dank that the Thymosin he asked about a few days earlier was ready.
Dank claimed that he never picked it up and Alavi’s records indicated the substances were neither dispensed to Dank nor Essendon nor paid for. Incomprehensively, during his interview with Giordani, Staffer 7 never asked whether the substance was dispensed to Dank. Presumably, the reason being that he knew the answer because Alavi had given him all his dispensing records and he knew they hadn’t been dispensed!
The claim that Thymosin Beta-4 was never dispended to Dank was confirmed by SIA in response to my 9 June 2020 FOI request (20-4) for “A stock record from Como Compounding that indicates that vials of Thymosin Beta-4 were delivered to Stephan Dank / Essendon FC between January 2012 and September 2012.” On 21 August 2020, SIA confirmed in writing that no such document existed.
Incomprehensibly, during the CAS hearing, tribunal member, former Chief Justice of the New South Wales Supreme Court, The Hon. Justice Jim Spiegelman AC QC, said (at page 814, line 14, of Day 5 transcript): “I don’t think it was an issue that he [Dank] got it [the 15 vials of Thymosin Beta-4 from Vania Giordani]; it was a question of where it went.” Res ipsa loquitur, Spiegelman’s incomprehensible claim/mistake led to the unjust guilty verdict. - Confirmation that Alavi not only provided Staffer 7 with his transaction history but also proved that neither Dank nor Essendon took possession of Thymosin Beta-4 in either 2011 or 2012.
Alavi’s 26 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 59 line 32):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Now, very early on you mentioned the last transaction you had with Stephen Dank was September 2013 and some of the material that you’ve got to produce is a download from your system of all the transactions.”
Alavi “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “A transaction history.”
Alavi: “Yes. We have got Steve Dank’s [and Essendon’s] dispensing history. {document 48}
Staffer 7 (page 47): ‘Similarly, in the invoices obtained from Mr Alavi, which pertain to Mr Dank (personally), there is no reference to any Thymosin being supplied to him as a customer in the 2011 and 2012 calendar years.”
Copy of page 25 clause 209 of the statement that Mr Staffer 7 wrote for Mr Alavi: “Within these invoices there is no reference to Thymosin of any kind being applied to Mr Dank (as a patient) in the 2011 and 2012 calendar years.”
Clause 212: “In any event, the only reference to ‘Thymosin (of any kind) in the Dank dispensing records occur in 2013.”
My comment: Dank left Essendon in September 2012. Clearly, what happened in 2013 is irrelevant. Furthermore, the transaction history proved that Alavi never dispensed Thymosin Beta-4 to Dank or Essendon in 2011 and 2012. - Further confirmation from Alavi that he never dispensed Thymosin Beta-4 to Dank in 2011 or 2012.
Alavi’s 26 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 61, line 19):
Alavi: “So, if, if — you can pretty much assume everything in this document — in this dispensing history has been picked up.”
Staffer 7: “Okay.”
Alavi: “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “All right. In relation to Stephen Dank, you’ve actually gone and checked the dispensing – – – “
Alavi: “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “Records you’ve got.”
Alavi: “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “And you are confident to say that, effectively what’s listed in that there you’re going to produce to me – – “
Alavi: “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “Has been given physically to Stephen Dank?”
Alavi: “Yes.”
Staffer 7: “Has been supplied?”
Alavi: “Yes.”
My comment This exchange proved Thymosin Beta-4 was never dispensed to Dank or Essendon - As the substance labelled Thymosin was never tested, no one knew, or could have known, what the substance was.
Alavi’s 26 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 142, line 34):
Alavi: “I didn’t – I just didn’t trust – wasn’t – didn’t trust what I was getting from Cedrick [Anthony from China], so much so that I went to the University of Melbourne. I went to the Royal Melbourne Hospital and I pay $15,000 a year – to use their labs.”
My comment: This is further confirmation that Alavi rightfully believed that if you didn’t test the substance, you had no idea what it was. The delivery from China arrived at Como Compounding Pharmacy on 28 December 2011. Alavi accepted that it was fried when exposed to the light and consequently it wasn’t tested. Alavi’s comment here was further proof no one could know what substance was brought to Australia on 28 December 2011. Clearly, it didn’t matter what it was because it was thrown out. - Alavi inadvertently misled Staffer 7 about his testing protocols
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 169):
Alavi: “So, I get everything [from Australia] tested every six months just to make sure my staff are compounding correctly. But with the peptides, because they were coming from overseas, I couldn’t trust them. (my emphasis). That’s why I was testing every batch.”
My comment: Alavi forgot that he didn’t test the vial labelled Thymosin that was delivered to him on 28 December 2011 because he believed Eagle’s quote for testing was excessive. - Although Eagle tested some substances Alavi sent them, it didn’t test the substance labelled Thymosin because he believed the quote for testing was excessive.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 176):
Alavi: “Yeah. Because that was the first supply that came in and I was very worried about it so I sent little batches off to Eagle.” - Staffer 7 led the witness by falsely claiming that Thymosin Beta-4 was procured by Charter
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 254, line 1):
Staffer 7: “No. Okay. So, if can give you that context now, that’s Steven Dank is asking Shane Charter for Thymosin Beta 4, and Shane Charter is asking you to compound the Thymosin. He’s not stipulating whether it’s Alpha or Beta 4.”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
Staffer 7: “But given the context I’ve given you before, and given the fact that only Beta 4 was procured from China – -“
Alavi: “Yeah. You’re going to see them as Beta 4.”
Staffer 7: “Yeah.”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
My comment Staffer 7 is leading the witness through an untruthful statement. There was no evidence that Thymosin Beta-4 was ever procured from China. Shane Charter claimed that Dank asked him to procure both Thymosin and Thymosin Beta-4. The only packages sent from China were labelled Thymosin. As the first delivery (28 December 2011) was fried and never analysed no one knows what substance it was. The second parcel delivered on 18 February 2012 was labelled Thymosin. There is no evidence it was ever dispensed (see clause 13 in Executive Summary. There was no evidence Thymosin Beta-4 was ever procured from China as falsely claimed by Staffer 7. - After having been manipulated by Staffer 7 into agreeing with ‘Staffer 7’s testimony’, Alavi withdrew his yes response.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 254, line 16):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Because you don’t have any Thymosin Alpha?”
Staffer 7: “So, is it fair that – would you agree then that it’s Thymosin Beta 4 that your reference to Thymosin?”
Alavi: “Yes. Yeah, I guess. I mean, I can’t be 100 per cent because I don’t have the testing in front of me. But it’s unlikely to be the Alpha because of, you know, the invoices and everything else.”
My comment: Staffer 7 manipulated Alavi to initially agree with his narrative that it was Thymosin Beta-4, but in the same breath, Alavi said he can’t be 100 per cent sure. Furthermore, Alavi stated that all the invoices contained the word Thymosin. - Staffer 7 successfully manipulated Alavi to agree that the substance was Thymosin Beta-4 by falsely claiming that TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 were the same substance.
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (Page 254, line 44):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Yeah. Now, on the 12″ of January, Mr Charter has emailed a document to Mr Dank and you which described how to use TB-500 Thymosin Beta 4. And the document seems to be describing the optimum means by which to prepare. administer and store Thymosin Beta 4.”
Alavi: “Yep, yep, yep.”
Staffer 7: “So, if I add that into the mix there.”
Alavi:”So, you can assume that’s Beta 4.”
Staffer 7: “Well, can we ‘take it further than assume? Do you think it’s fairly compelling now that it’s Thymosin Beta 4?”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
My comment: Staffer 7 successfully manipulated Alavi to agree that the substance was Thymosin Beta-4 by falsely claiming that TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 were the same substance. As stated previously, TB-500 contains 7 amino acids and Thymosin Beta-4 has 43 amino acids in a specific sequence, so, they are not the same substance.
Staffer 7 knew that the document Charter emailed to Alavi was a fraudulent attempt by the manufacturer of TB-500 to convince the prospective buyer that TB-500 was the same substance as the better known Thymosin Beta-4. The document was fraudulent - Staffer 7 manipulated Alavi to agree with his false claim that the Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4.
Transcript
Alavi’s 29 November 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Staffer 5 (page 265):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “So, can I take it then that the reference to peptide Thymosin on that is the Thymosin that you’re working on here?”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
Staffer 7: “Which we’ve seemed to have established that it’s more likely than not it would be Thymosin beta 4.”
Alavi: “Yeah.”
My comment: Despite saying “yea” to Staffer 7’s narrative, on many occasions, Alavi said as it was never tested, he didn’t know what it was. Staffer 7 was leading the witness in securing Alavi’s agreement with his (Staffer 7) statement that we’ve seemed to have established that it’s more likely than not it would be Thymosin Beta 4. - Staffer 7 continually kept falsely repeating that Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4, and Alavi for the nth time said: “He can’t be sure what type of Thymosin it was.”
Alavi’s 11 December 2013 interview with Staffer 7 and Matt Sheens (pages 11 and 12):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “So, both the Hexarelin and Thymosin – Thymosin Beta-4 were in clear vials?”
Staffer 7: “Was that Thymosin Beta 4 as well as Hexarelin?”
Alavi: “It was – There was definitely Hexarelin in there and the Thymosin I can’t be sure what type of Thymosin it is.”
Alavi: “Yes, I can’t say Thymosin Beta 4 or Thymomodulin. I mean the emails all point to Thymosin Beta 4 but”
Staffer 7: “Yes, because I think we worked through that process.”
Alavi: “Yes.”
Alavi: “It’s hard to know what it was, and that was the reason for the testing really.”
My comment: Staffer 7 stated Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4 which he knew wasn’t true. He then tried to manipulate Alavi to agree it was Thymosin Beta-4 by saying “We have already worked through that process.” As it wasn’t tested no one knows what it was. - Staffer 7 lied through omission. Charter also told Staffer 7 that at their (Dank & Charter) 13 September meeting, Dank told Charter that he required both Thymosin and Thymosin Beta-4.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (pages 13 and 14)
Transcript
“A couple of days after his 11 September 2011 SMS exchange with Mr Dank, Mr Charter claims that he met with Mr Dank (the September meeting) and that Mr Dank ordered a number of WADA prohibited peptides from him … Mr Charter recalled the following: ‘During [the September meeting] Dank told me that he needed the peptides, GHRP-6, IGF1-LR3, and CJC-1295 for a research project he was conducting with athletes… He also told me that he needed Thymosin Beta-4.’”
My comment: Nothing could be clearer, Charter saw Thymosin and Thymosin Beta-4 as separate products. Tragically, for the players, ASADA lied continuously throughout the collection of the evidence, when it claimed Thymosin and Thymosin Beta-4 were the same product. - No one could be certain what Dank said in his 1 April interview with McKenzie because in his 11 April 2013 article he quoted Dank saying “Thymosin”. However, in his 5 July article, which he was also quoting from the 1 April interview, he quoted Dank saying “Thymosin Beta-4”.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 41):
Transcript
“Mr Dank’s ignorance as to the WADC status of Thymosin Beta-4 is given further credence by his admission to Fairfax journalists about his use of Thymosin Beta-4 at Essendon. Those admissions were recounted in the Age on 5 July 2013 in an article titled ‘Drug suspicions over Essendon grows’.”
My comment: Staffer 7 is planting evidence through omission. The 5 July 2013 article was written on the basis of material supplied by Dank in a 1 April 2013 interview with McKenzie. Staffer 7 failed to mention that 85 days before, on 11 April 2013, McKenzie wrote an article for the Age based on the same 1 April interview. In that 11 April article, McKenzie said: “When asked why Thymosin peptides were given to players as an immune system booster when there is debate about their effectiveness, Dank said: ‘Well, apart from the fact that we won 11 out of our first 14 games … at the end of the day, I was very happy with the science.’”
In the 5 July 2013 article McKenzie replaced the word Thymosin with Thymosin Beta-4 while still stating it was an immune booster. Clearly, no one could be comfortably satisfied as to what word McKenzie asked Dank to comment on. Unconscionably, and in a blatant breach of the law, ASADA did not table the 11 April 2013 favourable article to the players in discovery. That was a major breach of WADA’s legal responsibilities.
Thymosin Beta-4 has never been acknowledged as an immune booster. Alpha-1 (Thymomodulin) is the recognised immune booster that boosts recovery from games and strenuous work outs. During his explanation to McKenzie as to the reason for using the substance, Dank said: “There is a degree of immune-suppression after a game or a hard training week. Often times the ability to back up next week is decreased by a hit on the immune system.” Such a comment supports the contention that Dank was referring to Thymosin (Alpha-1/Thymomodulin), not Thymosin Beta-4.
In an attempt to clarify whether Dank responded to McKenzie suggesting Dank used Thymosin or Thymosin Beta-4, I made an FOI request for the audio of the 1 April 2013 telephone interview. SIA refused me access. - Staffer 7 continually, falsely claimed that Thymosin was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4. Furthermore, Staffer 7 also, without any evidence to support his contention, repeatedly claimed that Dank knew Thymosin-Beta-4 was a prohibited substance.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 41)
Transcript
Staffer 7: “It is also probable that Mr Dank’s reason for obtaining the back dated ‘WADA compliance statement’ from Mr Alavi was his discovery that the Thymosin he had been providing the Essendon players (Thymosin Beta-4) was in fact prohibited.”
My comment: This is a reprehensible statement and a possible breach of the Crimes Act because in his own words, page 47, line 25 of Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report: he said: “Similarly, in the invoices obtained from Mr Alavi which pertain to Mr Dank (personally) there is no reference to any Thymosin being supplied to him as a customer in the 2011 and 2012 calendar years.”
Furthermore, Dank could not have discovered Thymosin Beta-4 was allegedly a prohibited substance before 10:34:17 AM on 4 February 2013 when ASADA unlawfully changed the status on its ‘Check Your Substances’ website. - Staffer 7 misrepresented the facts in a Belgian Court case in an attempt to prove that Dank knew in May 2012 that TB-500 was a prohibited substance,
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 41).
Transcript
Staffer 7: “A realisation that is likely to have occurred [Dank learning that TB-500 was banned] following an SMS exchange with a Doctor Amir Nekoee on 31 May 2012, in which Mr Dank’s attention was directed to an “interesting [cycling] article that had just been published. The below SMS communication between the parties is telling:
| From Person Message | Message |
| Nekoee | Check it tomorrow when rested man. Website link and also interesting article that just popped up in cycling news you might enjoy. |
| Dank | But Thymomysin (sic) isn’t a banned product |
| Nekoee | Mate, I was sleeping. As far as Thymosin being banned or not that’s why I sent you the link. Thought you would like to read it. |
My comment: Staffer 7 was supposed to be recording evidence that could be assessed in determining whether ASADA could make a case that the Essendon players were administered a WADA prohibited substance. Staffer 7’s comment that, “A realisation that is likely to have occurred”, surely doesn’t fit the evidence criteria.
It was unconscionable for Staffer 7 to claim that Dr Nekoee’s SMS exchange in May 2012 was the reason for Dank wanting Alavi to sign a February 2013 dated letter. The Belgian cyclist Wim Vans Evenant whom Dr Nekoee was referring to was charged with importing TB-500 into Belgium but when the vials labelled TB-500 were analysed, they weren’t TB-500. Clearly, irrespective of what is on the label, unless the substance is analysed, no one can say what it is. Furthermore, Dank knew that neither TB-500 nor Thymosin Beta-4 was listed by names in 2012 as prohibited substances.
- Although the package that was delivered to Alavi was labelled Thymosin, Staffer 7 unconscionably falsely said it was Thymosin Beta-4.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 22, line 20)
Transcript
Staffer 7: “On 29 December 2011, Mr Charter contacted Mr Alavi via SMS stating: ‘[the courier tracking] says the peptides delivered 3.30 yesterday have you got them’. It is verily believed that the package delivered contained the following peptide material: 0.25 grams of Thymosin Beta-4’.”
My comment: Staffer 7’s statement that “it is verily believed” is untrue. “Verily” means truly, beyond doubt, definitely. The raw material was labelled ‘Thymosin’. The substance was never tested. No one, including Charter, Alavi, Dank and Staffer 7 himself, knew whether the substance was Thymosin Alpha-1, or Thymosin Alpha-2, or Thymosin Beta-10, or Thymosin Beta-15 or Thymosin Beta-4. In fact, as it was never tested, it may not have even been a variety of Thymosin. - Staffer 7 misrepresented the evidence by creating the false impression that Thymosin was interchangeable with Thymosin Beta-4.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 5, clause 5):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “Although the species of Thymosin was not specified on the [Consent] form as either Alpha or Beta-4, Thymosin Beta-4 is a prohibited S2 Category substance.”
My comment: Staffer 7 was falsely implying that Thymosin and Thymosin Beta-4 were the same substance. - Staffer 7 tampered with the evidence by replacing the word Thymosin with the word Thymosin Beta-4
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 25):
Transcript
Staffer 7: “On 18 February 2012, Mr Alavi receives a further supply of peptides from China via Mr Anthony. Included in this supply was a gram each of Thymosin Beta-4 and Hexarelin.”
My comment: Staffer 7 breached the Crimes Act by replacing the word ‘Thymosin’ with the word ‘Thymosin Beta-4’. The Herald Sun (16 October 2019) exposed ASADA’s chicanery. It speaks for itself, that if Thymosin was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4, as claimed by Staffer 7, there was no reason for Staffer 7 to tamper with the evidence by replacing Thymosin with Thymosin Beta-4. - Staffer 7 misrepresented the situation by falsely implying that Kogarah compounding pharmacist sold Thymosin Beta-4 to two Cronulla rugby league players.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 12):
Staffer 7: “On 23 August 2011, Mr Dank sent the following SMS to Mr Robinson: ‘Don’t forget how important Thymosin is. This is going to be our vital cornerstone next year (my emphasis). It is the ultimate assembly regulatory protein and biological modifier.’ As will become apparent later in this report Mr Dank’s reference to ‘Thymosin’ is reasonably believed to be a reference to Thymosin Beta 4, a WADC Prohibited (S2 Category) Substance.”
My comment: Staffer 7 was being untruthful in claiming Mr Dank’s reference to ‘Thymosin’ is reasonably believed to be a reference to Thymosin Beta-4. On pages 27 and 28, Staffer 7 links the 23 August 2011 text to Kogarah peptide supplier Mr Sedrak’s treatment of two Cronulla rugby league players. During his two interviews, Sedrak told Staffer 7 that he had never (my emphasis) used Thymosin Beta-4.
Herald Sun 16 October 2019, page 10 story. - Staffer 7 reprehensibly, added the words “at Essendon” to the original text in order to implicate Essendon players. (Source: Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 28):
Staffer 7: “SMS exchange between Mr Dank and Mr Robinson on 23 August 2011 when Mr Dank intimated that “Thymosin … [was] going to be [their] vital cornerstone next year” at Essendon (my emphasis) [132]
My comment: Although Staffer 7 was quoting from the same 23 August 2011 text in pages 12 and 28, the texts were different. The page 12 verbatim quote did not include the words “at Essendon”. However, Staffer 7 breached the Crimes Act by inserting the words “at Essendon” on page 28. At the time (23 August 2011) he had not even been approached about a job at Essendon. In fact, at the time, Dank was treating Dean Robinson’s injured weight-lifter wife. - Although ASADA produced a hand-written one-page document by Alavi’s lab assistant in discovery that stated that one gram of Thymosin was received on 18 February 2012, Staffer 7 unconscionable claimed that in his interview with Alavi, he claimed it was Thymosin Beta-4.
Herald Sun 16 October 2019: Under the heading ‘The China Order’, the Herald Sun said: “Staffer 7’s synopsis of his interviews with chemist Nima Alavi, the ASADA investigator, records him as saying: ‘On 18 February 2012, my laboratory received one gram of each of the following peptides … CJC-1295, THYMOSIN BETA-4 (my emphasis), Hexarelin, GHRP-6 and Melanotan II.’ But Alavi’s lab assistant Vania Giordani recorded on a piece of paper he [Alavi’s Como Compounding Pharmacy] had in fact received one gram of THYMOSIN (my emphasis), not THYMOSIN BETA-4 (my emphasis).”
My comment: Attached is a screen shot from the lab assistant Giordani Vani’s paper recording of the delivery. In his summary above, ASADA Staffer 7 then tampered with the evidence and changed Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4. Worst still, Staffer 7 attributed the change to Alavi.
The chain of custody between the Chinese manufacture and the delivery to Alavi in Melbourne on 28 December 2011 was broken when Charter’s business associate removed all the labels from the vials and stored them in a fridge with other vials in his Shanghai factory. Charter claimed that he ordered the labels to be removed so that no one knew the source, and therefore, couldn’t cut him out of a deal.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 22): On 20 December 2011, Mr Anthony collected the peptide material from GL Biochem and facilitated their courier to Mr Alavi. The courier is subject of internet tracking by Mr Charter.
My comment: The parcel sent by Anthony to Alavi was labelled Thymosin. As it was not tested, no one knows what substance it was.
Staffer 7 has disingenuously omitted a crucial part of the story. Anthony took the peptides from GL Biochem to his own factory in Shanghai. At Shane Charter’s insistence, Anthony removed all the labels to ensure Alavi couldn’t identify, and thus, couldn’t deal directly with the manufacturer. He removed the labels from the vials and stored them in a fridge with other peptides. At this point, the chain of custody had been broken. He subsequently forwarded some of the substances in his fridge to Alavi. There is no way of knowing whether the vials sent by courier to Como were the same as those vials he picked up from GL Biochem. Second, as the substances weren’t analysed, no one, including Alavi, Dank, Staffer 7 or even the CAS tribunal members knew what the vials contained - As, the anti-doping authority in Australia, it was compulsory for ASADA to know the content of all WADA prohibited substances. It was therefore reprehensible that Staffer 7 falsely claimed that TB-500, which contained seven amino acids, was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4, which contained 43 amino acids.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 23): On 12 January 2012, Mr Charter also emailed a document to Mr Dank and Mr Alavi which described ‘How to Use TB-500 (Thymosin Beta-4)
My comment: This was a fake document distributed by a deceitful manufacturer who was incorrectly claiming that TB-500 was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4. WADA’s star witness, Professor Handelsman, stated under oath that TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 were different products. (Source: CAS transcript, day 2, page 189, line 38). - Staffer 7 falsely linked treatment of two Cronulla rugby league players with the alleged treatment of Essendon AFL players. Just as sinisterly, Staffer 7 linked the two Cronulla players, who dealt directly with Sedrak, with Dank, who Staffer 7 acknowledged didn’t receive Thymosin of any variety in 2011 and 2012.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 27 and 28): “Notably, Mr Sedrak advised ASADA that he also had some dealings with Mr Dank in regards to ‘Thymosin Beta’ which Mr Sedrak explained was “a chain of amino acids.
My comment: It was unconscionable for Staffer 7 to imply Thymosin Beta was the same substance at Thymosin Beta-4. Sedrak refers to Thymosin beta. There are many varieties of Thymosin Beta, eg Thymosin Beta-10, Thymosin Beta-15. He doesn’t say it was Thymosin Beta-4. In fact, Sedrak claimed that he never used Thymosin Beta-4.
Sedrak was interviewed by ASADA’s Staffer 9 and Staffer 10 at 11:08 AM on 20 November 2013. Inter alia, the transcript read as follows:
Staffer 9: “Are there different types of thymosin?”
Sedrak: “I got a book about – there are hundreds.”
Staffer 9: “Is thymosin beta the same as thymosin beta-4?”
Sedrak: “The beta can be 4 or not 4.”
Staffer 9: “Okay, and what do you put there?”
Sedrak: “The beta. Beta general. It’s a different derivative of the beta.”
Sedrak: “The beta 4 is a different derivative of the beta.”
Staffer 9: “So, did you ever prepare thymosin beta-4?”
Sedrak: “No, Beta.”
Staffer 9: “You are an expert.” - From time-to-time, Staffer 7 coerced Alavi into agreeing with his false statements. Invariably, almost in the same breath, Alavi corrected himself and said he couldn’t be sure what it was.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 29):
Transcript
‘Peptide Thymosin’ is Thymosin Beta-4 [sub heading]
“When initially questioned by ASADA, Mr Alavi expressed uncertainty about the type of Thymosin (Alpha or Beta-4 he supplied to Mr Dank and invoiced to the Essendon Club as peptide Thymosin’. However, as ASADA’s holdings (as reflected in the chronology of key events) were revealed to Mr Alavi during interview, he ultimately conceded that the ‘peptide Thymosin’ was in fact Thymosin Beta-4:
Alavi: Yes. Yeah, I guess. I mean, I can’t be 100 per cent (my emphasis) because I don’t have the testing in front of me. But it’s unlikely to be Alpha because of you know the invoices and everything else … yeah, so you can … so you can assume that’s Beta-4. [133] Transcript of interview between Nima Alavi and ASADA, conducted between 19 – 29 November 2013, page 255. TRIM BDOC13-69542 134.
“As will be discussed below, the ability to identify ‘peptide Thymosin as Thymosin Beta-4 is put beyond doubt following evidence produced by Mr Alavi in response to the disclosure notices served upon him.”
My comment: This was an unconscionable misrepresentation by Staffer 7 of Alavi’s position. Although Staffer 7 put words in Alavi’s mouth, Alavi didn’t agree peptide Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4. The implication of what Staffer 7 espoused here was destroyed in clause 93 of his 11 January 2015 affidavit. Staffer 7 said: “The key question is what was the source of the Thymosin; and when (if at all) (my emphasis) it was delivered – and in what coloured vial?” Clearly, Staffer 7’s comment “if at all” implies ASADA had no evidence that Thymosin of any variety was ever delivered to Dank or Essendon. Furthermore, at page 47, line 25, of Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report, he said: “Similarly, in the invoices obtained from Mr Alavi [Como Compounding Pharmacy] which pertain to Mr Dank (personally) there is no reference to any [type of] Thymosin being supplied to him as a customer in the 2011 and 2012 calendar years.” As no substance that was analysed revealed it to be Thymosin of any variety. - Staffer 7 falsely claimed that TB-500 (containing 7 amino acids) and Thymosin Beta-4 (containing 43 amino acids) were the same substance. Res ipsa loquitur, 7 has never equalled 43.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 32): “Notably, attached to the ‘Thymosin’ internet link is the very same document that was emailed by Mr Charter to both Mr Dank and Mr Alavi on 12 January 2012 concerning the optimum means by which to prepare, administer and store “Thymosin Beta-4”. This evidence is of itself a compelling basis upon which to conclude that the Thymosin supplied by Mr Alavi was in fact Thymosin Beta-4 — this being the same substance es as ‘peptide Thymosin’.”
My comment:Staffer 7 misrepresented the evidence in claiming “this evidence is of itself a compelling basis upon which to conclude that the Thymosin supplied by Mr Alavi was in fact Thymosin Beta-4”.
Clearly, Staffer 7 forgot that Alavi’s dispensing records indicated that Alavi didn’t supply Dank with any variety of Thymosin in 2011 and 2012.
As pointed out earlier, Staffer 7 misrepresented the evidence when he implied that TB-500 was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4. Even his star witness Professor Handelsman stated under oath that TB-500 and Thymosin Beta-4 were not the same product. (Source: CAS transcript, day 2, page 189, line 38).
Res ipsa loquitur, the email sent by Charter to Dank and Alavi on 12 January 2012 contained the protocols for administering [among others] TB-500 which contains seven amino acids. Thymosin Beta-4 contains 43 amino acids in a particular sequence. Clearly seven is not the same as 43. Thus, the document did not contain the protocols for administering Thymosin Beta-4. - Staffer 7 used different recollections by Suki Hobson and Dean Robinson of the colour of vials they used to make a false case that Essendon high performance manager Dean Robinson had administered Thymosin Beta-4 to the players. Staffer 7’s case was built around omitting evidence given by Robinsonthat he had never seen a clear vial. Source: 20 July 2014 interview with Staffer 7 and Grant Staffer 7 (page 18, line 47).
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 34): “Furthermore, during the 2012 season Ms Hobson stated she had assisted Mr Robinson to inject players with a substance drawn by her from [clear] glass vials.
My comment: It was one thing for Staffer 7 to falsely claim that TB-500 was the same substance as Thymosin Beta-4. But surely, it was a new low for Staffer 7 to imply that a vial he called “a substance” was in fact Thymosin Beta-4. Irrespective of who was correct, it was irrelevant whether it was drawn from a clear or amber vial because Robinson said the substance was AOD-9640. (Source 20 July 2014, interview with Staffer 7 and Grant Staffer 7 (page 17, line 34).
To make a case, Staffer 7 was duplicit by omission. During Staffer 7’s four interviews with Essendon high performance manager Dean Robinson, Robinson said he had never seen a clear vial. (Source: 20 July 2014 interview with Staffer 7 and Grant Staffer 7, page 18, line 47).
To compound Staffer 7’s credibility problem in making the case that Robinson allegedly administered Thymosin Beta-4 from a clear vial, he omitted to say that at page 11, line 32, of his 8 August 2013 interview with Staffer 5 and Sharon Kerrison, Robinson said: “I have never heard of Thymosin Beta-4.”
Staffer 7 regularly cherry-picked Alavi’s comments to suit his narrative.
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 39): “What is of glaring importance from these assertions by Mr Alavi is the suggestion by Mr Dank that Thymosin Alpha and Thymosin Beta-4 are “all the same thing”, with Thymosin Beta-4 simply being a different name for Thymosin Alpha – an error of diabolic consequences to an athlete subject to an anti-doping violation.”
My comment: It’s incomprehensible for Staffer 7 to emphatically state that Alavi was correct in saying Dank told him that Thymosin Alpha and Thymosin Beta-4 were “all the same thing”. I doubt whether a primary school science student would think something labelled Alpha was the same as something labelled Beta.
Shane Charter told Staffer 7 in his interview that Dank knew there were different types of thymosins and he therefore knew Alavi misunderstood what Dank told him. - Staffer 7 misused Eagle Analytical Services ignorance of thymosin varieties to falsely imply that Alavi requested it to analyse Thymosin Beta-4. Arguably, he breached the Crimes Act by tampering with the evidence. He replaced the word Thymosin with Thymosin Beta-4 in Alavi’s emails to Eagle Analytical Services
Staffer 7’s Final Investigation Report (page 55): “In an email to Eagle Analytical Services on 6 February 2012, Mr Alavi advised the Assistant Laboratory Manager that in regards to Hexarelin, CJC-1295, Thymosin Beta-4, HGH, GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 are all peptides.”
My comment:ASADA was dishonest through omission. It was reprehensible that Staffer 7 started the communication with Eagle Analytical response on 6 February rather than Alavi’s initial email on 20 January 2012
Staffer 7 has corruptly planted evidence. Staffer 7 replaced the word ‘Thymosin’ in Alavi’s 6 February 2012 email with the word ‘Thymosin Beta-4’
The initial email was sent by Nima Alavi to Eagle Analytical Services on 20 January 2012. (Source clause 147 of the CEO Recommendation Show Cause Pack)
Alavi requested a quote for testing a substance he thought was Thymosin, not Thymosin Beta-4. (Source Page 31 of ASADA investigator’s Final Investigation Report). Alavi said: “After making the first batch of Thymosin and Hexarelin I had enquired with Eagle pharmaceuticals to test Thymosin and Hexarelin.”
Alavi sent an email to Eagle’s Carissa Camarillo at 4:10 pm on Monday 6 February 2012 saying: “Hexarelin, CJC and Thymosin are all peptides.”
Alavi sent an email to ASADA’s Staffer 4 at 3:24 pm clarifying comments in his interview. Alavi said: “After making up the first batch of Thymosin and Hexarelin I had enquired with Eagle pharmaceuticals to test Thymosin and Hexarelin.”
ASADA lied in claiming that TB-500 was the identical substance to Thymosin Beta-4. It is not the same. TB-500 contains 7 amino acids, not 43 amino acids. - Staffer 7 was testifying in his own investigation by repeatedly putting false words into Alavi’s mouth
Staffer 7’s Affidavit 11 January 2015:(page 13, clause 81). “At 11.03 AM on 12 March 2014, I sent an email to Mr Alavi posing a number of questions… Now focusing on the Thymosin only – we (ASADA) say the evidence readily establishes it to be Beta-4. Dank then procures those Peptides (TB4 and Hexarelin from under the false impression of having them tested at Mimotopes; he then later claims they were fried and disposed of by Mimotopes.
“Is the Thymosin purchased through Sichuan Hengli Beta-4 or Alpha? The price would seem to indicate Beta-4.
Staffer 7: “Within the body of the email, I stated … As a summary, we have established with your help that 26 vials of ‘peptide Thymosin’ and 21 vials of Hexarelin were delivered to Dank in clear vials in January 2012… Now focussing on the Thymosin only – we (ASADA) say the evidence readily establishes it to be Beta-4. Dank then procures those peptides (TB-4 and Hexarelin) from you under the false impression of having them tested at Mimotopes; he then later claims they were fired and disposed of by Mimotopes.”
My comment:Staffer 7 is leading the witness (Alavi) by putting words into Alavi’s mouth by stating “We (ASADA) say the evidence readily establishes it to be Beta-4. Staffer 7 was attempting to manipulate the evidence by manipulating Alavi. Staffer 7 was testifying in his own investigation. - Ironically, although Staffer 7 led Alavi on many occasions to agree that Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4, Staffer 7 admitted that there was no evidence that Alavi delivered Thymosin of any variety to Dank or Essendon.
Staffer 7’s Affidavit 11 January 2015, Clause 93: “At 6:44PM on 26 March 2014, I emailed Mr Alavi a document containing a chronology of events as they related to his involvement with Mr Dank, Mr Charter and others. This document was to be the genesis of Mr Alavi’s statement and subject matter of his final interview. Within the body of my email | stated: ‘You will also note that in May 2012, Dank is seeking Thymosin and indicates his intention to call Vania about arranging 15 vials. I think you were in Cannes at the time. The key question is what was the source of the Thymosin; and when (if at all) it was delivered — and in what coloured vial? (brown I would assume). (AW-23)’”
My comment: Staffer 7’s comment “when (if at all) it was delivered” indicates that Staffer 7 had no evidence that Thymosin was delivered to Dank. Furthermore, SIA’s response to my FOI request (20-4) revealed there were no such records. See clause 13, in Executive Summary. - At no stage did Alavi say or concede that he asked Eagle Analytical Services to analyse Thymosin Beta-4.
Alavi statement authored by Staffer 7 (Clause 110): “Ultimately, I did not have Eagle Analytical analyse the Hexarelin, Thymosin Beta-4 or CJC-1295.”
My comment: It is reprehensible that Staffer 7 prepared a statement for Alavi to sign that would have resulted in Alavi perjuring himself. Alavi used the term ‘Thymosin’ in his communications with Eagle. He never used the term Thymosin Beta-4. As it transpired, unconscionably, the un-signed Alavi statement was produced in discovery. - Staffer 7 continually tried to put words into Alavi’s mouth that Thymosin was Thymosin Beta-4.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 69): “In January 2012, I personally supplied Mr Dank with 21 vials of Hexarelin and 21 vials of what I reasonably believed (although I am not certain) was Thymosin Beta-4.”
My comment: Although there was a small qualification, Staffer 7 was throwing Alavi under the bus because his statement was tabled in discovery. Alavi frequently told Staffer 7 he had no idea what the substance was because the parcel was labelled Thymosin and it was never tested. Furthermore, Alavi told the Australian in that newspaper article that he thought that he was having words put into his mouth by WADA and ASADA and that they were trying to trap him into saying that it was Thymosin Beta-4, even though, to quote him: ‘He made it very clear repeatedly he didn’t know what it was.’ Source: Clelland QC, day 2 of CAS tribunal hearing transcript page 173. - Although Staffer 7 was almost exclusively responsible for changing Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4, on this occasion he threw Alavi under the bus by suggesting he sign a statement that included Alavi changing Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 121): “On 18 February 2012, my laboratory received one gram of each of the following peptides was received: CJC-1295, Thymosin Beta-4, Hexarelin, GHRP-6 and Melanotan II.”
My comment: It is reprehensible that Staffer 7 prepared a statement for Alavi to sign that would have resulted in Alavi perjuring himself. Alavi’s lab assistant Vania Giordani recorded on a piece of paper that Como Compounding Pharmacy had received one gram of Thymosin. Staffer 7’s, Alavi statement changed Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4, As it transpired, unconscionably, the un-signed Alavi statement was produced in discovery. - Despite evidence to the contrary, Staffer 7 persistently tried to manipulate Alavi into agreeing that he not only imported Thymosin Beta-4 from China, but that Thymosin Beta-4 was the only Thymosin variety that he stocked. Although, Alavi occasionally embraced Staffer 7 putting words in his mouth by responding with a “yeah”, in the same breath, he revoked the “yeah” saying he didn’t know.
Staffer 7’s 11 January 2015 Affidavit Clause 73: Staffer 7: “At 1.45pm on 6 March 2014, I sent Mr Alavi an SMS stating: ‘Hi Nima, sorry to be a pest but how are you going with the Thymosin Alpha – Thymomodulin dispenses?’”
Clause 74:Alavi: “Hi, thanks. I am still looking for the invoices. They all have Thymosin written so I can’t be sure which is Alpha and which is Beta4.”
My comment: Clause 74 provides irrefutable proof that Alavi could never assist Staffer 7, WADA or the CAS panel in deciding whether he compounded Thymosin Alpha-1 or Thymomodulin or Thymosin Beta-4 or Thymosin Beta-10 or Thymosin Beta-15 or another substance. - Alavi’s computer records of Dank’s invoices proved that he never supplied Thymosin or Thymosin Beta-4 to Dank.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 154 and 155): “I have been asked to produce the invoices for all products supplied to Essendon between 1 August 2011 and 29 September 2012. I have recovered five invoices numbered: 1611 (dated 30 November 2011); 1764 (dated 31 December 2011); 1924 (dated 31 January 2012); 2083 (dated 29 February 2012); and 2248 (dated 31 March 2012). NAM-17 Essendon Invoices. “
My comment: Alav’s dispatch and invoice records indicate neither Thymosin nor Thymosin Beta-4 was supplied to Essendon in 2011 and 2012.
Invoice 1611 pertained to pill boxes
Invoice 1764 pertained to Co-Enzyme tablets and multi-vitamins
Invoice 1924 pertained to multi-vitamins
Invoice 2083 pertained to tablets Mersyndol, L Caritine and L Arginine and multi-vitamins
Invoice 2248 pertained to Esberitox tablets and Systane eye drops - Staffer 7 omitted vital evidence that not only wasn’t Thymosin supplied to Mr Dank but neither was Thymosin Beta-4 supplied to him.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 209, 210 & 2012): “There is no reference of any kind of Mr Dank being supplied with Thymosin. For completeness, I have recovered the entire dispensing records as they pertained to Mr Dank as a patient NAM-25. The only reference to Thymosin of any kind in the Dank dispensing records occurs in 2013.” [Dank had left Essendon in September 2012].
My comment: As Alavi’s dispensing records confirmed Thymosin of any variety wasn’t dispensed to Dank, it is incomprehensible that ASADA prosecuted the case against the 34 Essendon players. - At 11:03 AM on 12 March 2014, Staffer 7 sent an email (clause 81, question 3) to Alavi posing a number of questions. Within the body of the email, he stated: ‘Is the Thymosin purchased through Sichuan Hengli Beta-4 or Alpha? The price would seem to indicate Beta-4.’
My comment: This is an outrageous attempt by Staffer 7 to manipulate Alavi’s evidence by putting words into his mouth. Staffer 7 didn’t know the price of Thymosin Alpha or Thymomodulin, so he wasn’t in a position to testify that the price indicated it was Thymosin Beta-4.
The extent of Staffer 7’s corruption is exemplified in Staffer 7’s affidavit and in Alavi’s statement written by Staffer 7. In Alavi’s statement, Staffer 7 wrote “the price per gram suggests to me that the thymosin was in fact thymosin beta-4.” These were almost the identical words used by Staffer 7 in his affidavit. They were not Alavi’s words. Staffer 7 the investigator was testifying. - Despite badgering by Staffer 7, Alavi refused to sign the statement authored by Staffer 7.
Staffer 7’s Affidavit 11 January 2015 (clause 140): “On 28 November 2014, [Alavi’s lawyer] Mr Marsh advised me by email that Mr Alavi ‘had decided not to sign the witness statement, nor to appear at the hearing of the AFL Tribunal to give evidence’.”
My comment Alavi told the author of ‘The Straight Dope’ Chip Le Grand that he refused to sign the statement written by Staffer 7 because Staffer 7 had “included information which wasn’t true” - Staffer 7 falsely implied that Alavi created a document at Dank’s behest that explained how to administer Thymosin Beta-4.
Staffer 7’s 11 January 2015 Affidavit (page 23, clause 142): “On 6 May 2013, AFL Intelligence Co-ordinator Mr Abraham Haddad forwarded me an email chain with an attachment. That attachment was document titled ‘Compounded Peptide Manual’ that had been compiled by Mr Alavi. “Mr Alavi later confirmed his authorship of this document during interview with ASADA.”
Alavi: (clause 229 of draft affidavit authored by Staffer 7): “The [Peptide] manual was compiled by me from internet research. I compiled the manual for the purpose of handing it to doctors at an ‘anti-aging’ conference In August 2012. Its purpose was to stimulate interest in the peptide market and therefore business for the pharmacy.”
My comment: In a sinister action, ASADA included reference to the Peptide Manual at the 3 November 2014 ADRVP meeting. The document contained a fraudulent article from the manufacturer of TB-500. ASADA deceitfully implied Alavi compiled the manual for Stephen Dank. This was a lie. Here Alavi clearly explains that he compiled the manual for doctors attending an “anti-aging” conference
This was more chicanery by Staffer 7. Staffer 7 corruptly implied that this document was authored by Alavi for Dank’s benefit and he implied that it proved Dank used Thymosin Beta-4 at Essendon. Alavi stated the document was compiled as a marketing tool for an August 2012 compounders conference. He said it had nothing to do with Dank. - Staffer 7 summarised the 437 Alavi interview transcript pages and 612 texts into a 31-page document, which he labelled ‘Alavi Statement’. A significant amount contained Staffer 7’s false evidence on Alavi’s behalf.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 69): “In January 2012, I personally supplied Mr Dank with 21 vials of Hexarelin and 26 vials of what I reasonably believed (although l am not certain) was Thymosin Beta-4. The supply of these peptides to Mr Dank was the first time I had supplied him with peptides and the only time I have ever supplied peptides in clear vials. Following the delivery of these substances to Mr Dank in clear vials I only ever used amber coloured vials to house peptides. I was advised by Mr Dank that peptides were photosensitive and therefore the use of clear vials was problematic.”
My comment: Staffer 7 was lying and planting evidence. He had no reason to say Alavi believed the substance was Thymosin Beta-4. The parcel from China was labelled Thymosin. Alavi said on numerous occasions that as he didn’t have the Thymosin analysed, he had no idea what it was.
Alavi told Chip Le Grand, the author of the book, ‘The Straight Dope’, that “he wouldn’t put his name to what he sees as a beat-up.”
Alavi also said: “Once I sign this [statement authored by Staffer 7], I have to back it up. It has to be 100 per cent accurate. So, I went through it and started reading it and it wasn’t accurate. There were bits missing. You know how you can cut and paste to make the whole thing sound so different? There was a bit of that going on. It wasn’t a true reflection of what I thought.”
Staffer 7 overcame Alavi’s failure to sign his statement by signing an affidavit saying the statement was a true recollection of what Alavi had said in his interviews. The affidavit contained a number of untruthful statements.
Alavi received some vials labelled Hexarelin and Thymosin from China on 28 December 2011. He compounded the substances and handed them to Dank in clear vials. When the Thymosin vials were exposed to light, the substances were fried and became unusable. - Alavi reversed the invoice – debit to credit – and thus there was no substance called Thymosin or Thymosin Beta-4 ever appearing on an Alavi generated invoice to Dank. As the fried substances were never analysed, no one knows what they were.
Alavi draft statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 97): “I have been asked by Investigator Staffer 7 whether the ‘peptide Thymosin’ referred to in the Essendon invoice (and supplied to Dank) was Thymosin Beta-4 or Thymosin Alpha. Although I cannot definitively recall, I am of the view that it more likely to have been Thymosin Beta-4.”
My comment: This was a lie. Alavi said on numerous occasions that as he didn’t have the thymosin analysed he had no idea what it was. - Staffer 7 changed the word Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4 on scores and scores of occasions.
Alavi draft statement authored by Staffer 7 for Alavi (clause 108):On 6 February 2012, I replied to Ms Camarillo, Assistant Laboratory Manager, Eagle Analytical Services via email that the six listed substances (Hexarelin, CJC-1295, Thymosin Beta-4, HGH (Human Growth Hormone), GHRP-2 and GHRP-6) were all peptides and included an internet link to further information in relation to Hexarelin, CJC-1295 and Thymosin Beta-4.
My comment: This Alavi email contained the word ‘Thymosin’. Staffer 7 planted evidence by replacing Thymosin with the word Thymosin Beta-4. - Many of the statements authored by Staffer 7 on Alavi’s behalf contained guesses by Staffer 7 of Alavi’s thoughts.
Alavi draft statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 117): “On 18 February 2012, I received a further supply of peptides from China that had been facilitated by Mr Charter’s associate, Mr Anthony. I am of the view that the 18 February 2012 supply was sourced from the same Chinese supplier as the December 2011 batch.”
My comment: As there were no accompanying documents with the delivery and as Alavi didn’t order them or pay for them, he had no idea where they came from. Staffer 7 was clearly including a comment in Alavi’s statement which wasn’t true. - Although Staffer 7 had a copy of Giordani’s handwritten note that contained the word ‘Thymosin’. He changed it to Thymosin Beta-4.
Alavi’s statement authored by Staffer 7 (page 16, clause 121): “On 18 February 2012, my laboratory received one gram of each of the following peptides was received: CJC-1295, Thymosin Beta-4, Hexarelin, GHRP-6 and Melanotan II.”
My comment: Staffer 7 has planted evidence in Alavi’s statement by stating that his laboratory received one gram of Thymosin Beta-4. His lab assistant Giordani recorded on a piece of paper that he had received one gram of Thymosin. Staffer 7 has lied in his Affidavit by replacing the word Thymosin with Thymosin Beta-4. NB On 16 October 2019, the Herald Sun published a photo of Giordani’s piece of paper. It had Thymosin, not Thymosin B4, as claimed by Staffer 7. It should be further noted that this package came ‘out of the blue.’. Alavi did not order these substances. He never paid for them. See clause 13 in Executive Summary. - Staffer 7 not only led the witness on countless occasions but inserted his words into Alavi’s statement as Alavi’s own
Alavi draft statement authored by Staffer 7 (Clause 131): “On 21 June 2012, I purchased a further 2 grams of ‘Thymosin’ (type unspecified) from Sichuan Technology at $3180 USD per gram. The price per gram suggests to me that the Thymosin was in fact Thymosin Beta-4.”
My comment: At page 13, clause 81 of his 11 January 2015 Affidavit, Staffer 7 said: “Is the Thymosin purchased through Sichuan Hengli Beta-4 or Alpha? The price would seem to indicate Beta-4.” (my emphasis)Staffer 7 made the unsubstantiated statement, not Alavi.
Furthermore, Alavi’s dispensing records indicated that the type was cream in a tube [like toothpaste] which was invoiced to ICB. ASADA never alleged that the players were administered anything from a tube. - Alavi’s recollection of what happened 18 months before was very inconsistent and often factually wrong.
Alavi draft statement authored by Staffer 7 (clause 141): “I can recall asking Mr Dank, in relation to the letter, to explain the difference between all these Thymosins. Mr Dank subsequently explained the substances, in such a way as to suggest that Thymosin Beta-4, Thymosin Alpha and Thymomodulin were all the same thing; that Thymosin Beta-4 was just a different name for Thymosin Alpha and Thymomodulin – a fact which I now know not to be true.”
My comment: Alavi clearly misunderstood Dank, and unless Staffer 7 is an idiot on the Binet scale, he must have known Alavi misunderstood Dank. It was incomprehensible for Alavi to make such a claim and for Staffer 7 to accept it. Dank, unlike Alavi and Staffer 7, knew that there were a number of varieties of thymosin. For example, Thymosin Alpha 1; Thymosin Alpha-2; Thymomodulin; Thymosin Beta-4; Thymosin Beta-10; Thymosin Beta-15. - Staffer 7 shamefully claimed that the “34 players signed consent forms agreeing to Thymosin Beta-4 injections and each of them admitted to receiving a number of injections”.
My comment: It is hard to imagine a more underhanded, reprehensible statement. The players signed a consent form that included the word Thymosin not Thymosin Beta-4. ASADA compounded its duplicity by combining two unrelated sentences into one sentence to imply that 34 players admitted to receiving Thymosin injections. No player admitted to receiving Thymosin Beta-4. They admitted to receiving other substances. Ironically, because no substance was tested, it was irrelevant what Dank told the players they were being administered and it was irrelevant what the players thought that they were administered. Furthermore, no player tested positive to a prohibited WADA substance.
Essendon AFL Drug Saga 