Some clarifications: RFEC (Spanish sporting authorities) actually gave some mixed messages regarding what they were trying to do, but for the most part you are correct. It was Justice Serrano that said it was not to be released. RFEC wanted most of all to go after Fuentes and Saiz first, the riders, they weren't as interested. RFEC however did support Valverde's appeal in 2006 to enter the World's, as then OP investigation was ongoing.
The statute of limitations on doping as far as the UCI is concerned is 8 years. It's pretty likely Valverde had his blood drawn for Fuentes in 2005. No dates however are listed on the blood bag (really, a bag of plasma), nor in Fuentes books, with Valverden's name, or code name (Valv-Piti) next to them.
We discussed much of this before, and I made some extremely long, but detailed posts
in this thread here.
Also discussed in this thread here.
Albertino - I think your passion outweighs your logic here. I think the 2006 Vuelta is a very good example of your argument though. Valverde rode great in the first week. Then held on in the second, and faded in the third and was exhausted at the end, while Vino & Kashi were doped up to their eyeballs and breezed to victory, looking very strong in the final week. None the less, this doesn't excuse the fact that about 4 years ago, Valverde at the very least intended to dope. Why he will receive a much tougher suspension than others who intended to dope (Basso, Diluca) and tougher than some that actually did dope (Petacchi) from the same organization (CONI) is highly suspect.
I still would like to know why for the last three years there has been such an effort to nail Valverde? He had one bag of plasma in Fuentes clinic, and his name appeared a few times in the ledgers. While several other riders retired, some were busted (Ullrich, Basso), and a few blacklisted - whether fairly or not - CONI, and the UCI have pretty much ignored many others entirely and focused on one man, and one man only: Alejandro Valverde.
Why?