Truth Under Water (25)
Nonfacts that influence WADA v. Sun Yang
Training Record — Is DCA’s signature real?
Now come to DCA’s signature on Wu’s Statement of Confidentiality (“SoC”), which is an essential issue as to the authenticity of the document.
The CAS panel was comfortably satisfied that Wu did sign the SoC, because he recognized his signature on the SoC.
On the one hand, the DCA remembered signing the Doping Control Form, but on the other, he did not seem to remember his Statement of Confidentiality (although he did confirm the validity of his signature when the document was shown to him)
— CAS Rehearing Award, 2021.06.22, para. 344
The language of the award gives an impression that Wu did not remember whether he signed the SoC or not, but in fact Wu did remember that he never signed the SoC. The panel chose not to disclose Wu’s relevant testimony in full, which is reprinted as follows.
WADA Counsel: Mr. Wu Bing, do you recall going with Ms. [Yang] in late January 2018 to observe the collection of urine samples?
Wu: I remember.
WADA Counsel: And do you recall that you performed the role of observing the collection of urine samples from two Chinese swimmers at Hangzhou College of Sports?
Wu: I remember this event, however, I do not remember where the location was, nor do I remember how many athletes were involved.
WADA Counsel: And do you recall signing a Doping Control Form for each of the athletes after you had observed them provide urine samples?
Wu: I have no idea what kind of form that is, but I did give my signature.
WADA Counsel: And do you recall prior to going on that sample collection, you signed a paper form indicating you had been trained for the role of assistant to observe urine sample collection?
Wu: I do not remember. At that time I was asked to give my signature because I took part in the event and observed someone to provide urine sample.
— Transcript of CAS Rehearing, 2021.05.25, 156:9
To sum up, Wu acknowledged giving signature to a Doping Control Form, though he did not know the exact name of the document, to evidence his participation after the urine sample collection. But he denied signing an SoC beforehand indicating that he had been given DCA training.
To solicit an affirmative answer from Wu, WADA’s counsel, instead of presenting both the Doping Control Form and the SoC side by side, showed Wu only the SoC bearing his “signature” without telling him what document it was. That was an objectionable leading question, especially considering that Wu did not understand English at all. From a glance at a document in unknown foreign language, Wu could only made out that there was his “signature,” but had no opportunity to find out whether it was forged or real.
Luckily, now we have plenty of time, as well as a tool called “bibliotics” — the scientific study of handwriting to determine its genuineness. People subconsciously develop habbits in their handwriting; the relative positions of and linkage among strokes is a unique set of “fingerprints” extending from everyone’s pen. Comparing the alleged signatures against those “fingerprints” could differentiate the fake from the genuine.
Here are three signatures of Wu appeared on the produced documents. The one on the left is the signature in Wu’s SoC, the genuiness of which is to be examined (the “Questioned Signature”). The two on the right are self-evidenced genue signatures (the “Real Signatures”) — the middle one is what Wu gave on Dr. Ba’s statement, and the right one is the signature on Wu’s written statement.
Firstly, positions of the short horizontal stroke up-left and the long vertical stroke in the middle. For the Real Signatures, the long vertical stroke starts well above the short horizontal stroke. But for the Questioned Signature, both strokes are at the same horizontal level.
Secondly, linkage between the up-left two horizontal strokes. For the Real Signatures, the upper short horizental stoke and the long one beneath it are connected with a left-falling stroke. But for the Questioned Signature, those two strokes are independent with no connection.
Thirdly, linkage among the vertical hook from the bottom to connect the dot up-middle and the left-falling up-right. For the Real Signatures, those three strokes, hook-dot-falling, are all connected as one unity. But for the Questioned Signature, there is no connection among the three — hook is a hook, dot is a dot, and falling is a falling.
Finally, linkage among two vertical strokes and a short horizontal stroke on the right. For the Real Signatures, the three strokes are connected together, forming a letter “Z.” But for the Questioned Signature, the horizontal stroke and the lower vertical stroke are crossed, making an arabic number “4.”
Wu’s SoC was counter-signed by Doping Control Officer (“DCO”) Yang, who was giving the DCA training and probably the only one had the opportunity to forge Wu’s signature before the SoC being archived with IDTM. Sounds incredible? Well, at least there is evidence that Yang didn’t hesitate to forge Wu’s signature in the digital Doping Control Form on the night in question.
Then KAM asked me to submit paperless DCF ASAP. But I couldn’t do that without a real urine sample code and athlete’s final signature. So I had to random typed in a urine kit code, filled in urine sample information randomly and signed with my signature at the end to submit the paperless DCF. Mr. Yang SUN didn’t do any step of urine sample collection and before he left, we only finished notification, athlete info, lab/sample info, blood sample and declaration of use. All the other parts, urine sample, comments, supplementary and final signature were added by DCO later in order to submit a paperless DCF.
— Supplementary Report by Yang, 2018.09.07, 3:42
DCO Yang confessed that she signed her own name in athlete’s signature block in order to submit the digital Doping Control Form. She, however, concealed that she forged Wu’s signature in the urine sample section, in addition to manipulating relevant information.
In a sworn deposition, Wu testified that during the sample collection, Yang showed him the digital Doping Control Form in her iPad, but he never gave his signature on the digital form.
Sun’s Counsel: When [Yang] showed you her iPad, what did she say to you?
Wu: I don’t remember. She gave the iPad to me. It was full of English. I do not know much of the language. Could not understand it.
Sun’s Counsel: Did you give your signature on the iPad?
Wu: No.
Sun’s Counsel: Here is a copy of the screenshot of the document in the iPad. Was the signature there given by you?
Wu: No. It is not my handwriting.
— Transcript of Wu’s Deposition, 2019.10.17, 3:9
Facts speak louder than words. While bibliotics alone may not be adequate to prove that Wu’s signature was forged, evidence here and there, working together, casts heavy doubt as to whether Wu’s SoC was fabricated.
