Jørgen Nielsen at Feltet.dk, has written a very interesting column about the recents accusations of D'Hont. Entitled "Battle with the past or cynical money-grubbing?", it actually raises some very interesting questions about recent accusations against Cycling. I don't usually have a lot of time for conspiracy theories against Cycling, but this article actually made me take notice.

JN claims to have dug through the Belgian news media and cycling sites, and points out a number of interesting coincidences which certainly raise some interesting questions. He highlights the following sequence of events:

- Jean-Marie Dedecker makes accusations against Belgian Cycling. At the time, there were suggestions of this being blatant self-promotion.

- Shortly after, Dedecker starts talking about a manuscript in his keeping, that will expose the liars and bring the truth into light.

- Then HLN launches its direct front page assault on Quick Step manager Patrick Lefevere in an article written by Maarten Michielssen. The accusations, except for one person who can hardly be termed anything but "unreliable", are all anonymous. They are said to have been one QST rider plus a number of people from "the Cycling environment".

- It now turns out that one of the anonymous HLN sources was Jef D'Hont. This was published in Sportwereld, May 1. It also seems certain that the unnamed manuscript named by Senator Dedecker before, was in fact Jef D'Hont's book. D'Hont admits his book was written at the instigation of Dedecker.

- D'Hont's book was was supposed to have been published march 27, but got delayed due to the HLN articles (HLN was dominating the news). Because it was economically poor timing, of course, but also for judicial reasons (to avoid lawsuits), according to the publisher. Dedecker shortly summarizes the effect thus: that a couple of chapters about Rudy Pevenage and Jose De Cauwere (Belgian national team coach) were removed. The chapters were removed by Dedecker's son, who is a lawyer. The publishers are obviously worried about lawsuits, and have insured the company for $150 million against lawsuits. The only place where this was not possible was in the USA (so no US version likely).

- He points out the anonymity of the likely ghostwriter of D'Hont's book. And yet, it is no secret that Maarten Michielssens from HLN helped with the book. The publisher denies any direct ghostwriting, by saying: "The journalist only helped in the beginning with checking some facts. After that he didn't have very much with to do with the book." It is obviously not quite unreasonable to suspect that Michielssens may in fact be the unacknowledged ghostwriter on D'Hont's book.

- He points out that Der Spiegel, which was given near exclusive right to [publicize] the book, is also a magazine that has a history of emnity with Goodefroot. Most notably, Godefroot slammed them with a lawsuit back in 1999-2000. - and won.

- Funnily enough, D'Hont did not bring up Quick-Step and Lefevre at the book launch. When asked, he claimed: "I never worked with him, so I can't say anything about them." How then could he be the source of Dedecker and HLN? At the same time, according to Dedecker: "Jef has enough material for another book."

To an even greater extent than LA Confidential, there is an obvious pattern here of a group of people with an obvious benefit (fame and/or fortune) to be gained by cynically exploiting Cycling's poor reputation. And given their total lack of anything resembling proof (which D'Hont admits having destroyed), that is quite clearly what is going on here. Without being taken to account, the authors are able to make any accusations they feel like, and laugh all the way to the bank.

At the same time, it is up to the accused to try and prove their innocence - an impossible task made more so by the 10 years of time that have passed since. It's also a complete perversion of our system of justice, which does state that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

A point worth reflecting over - most especially for those who are quick to jump to the defence of their own heroes (and no, I am not thinking of anyone in particular), but then find no issue with condemning Godefroot, Riis, the Freiburg doctors, even the German state?!? on the basis of the accusations of a person who is a proven liar and a cabal of people with a vested interest in bringing the sport into disrepute.

I don't want to suggest that all the latest Belgian accusations are a big conspiracy. A healthy scepticism about Cycling as a sport is a fine thing - especially in these days when the scope of the problems in the sport are more obvious than ever - but that scepticism should be applied in respect to those who accuse Cycling as well - not just the one way.

You have some really good points here Strategy.
The problem for T-Mobile are that themselves has been spokespersons for a "prove your innocence strategy". Now their experiencing the other side of this strategy. So, I have no sympathies for'em.

Thanks for that translation, Strategy.

D'hont did spend 32 years working in cycling, so obviously he knows about things that went on outside of his specific employers. Of course Voet made the statements about soigneurs talking amongst themselves. And one of the HLN allegations was that Lefevre was a drug supplier at some point. If D'Hont did relate second hand information to Michielssen it's obvious he would deny it in public. Probably makes sense that he would deny giving first hand info also.