"Alberto Contador cleared of Clenbuterol charges"

Cycling News had this article.

"According to a number of Spanish newspapers, the competitions committee decided to rethink its verdict on Friday last week based on article 296 of the UCI’s regulations, which says that an athlete can be exonerated if they prove that they had inadvertently ingested a banned product through no fault or negligence on their part."

Now if a rider has a bottle of supplements then I understand how it can be shown to contain a banned substance that is not on the label. It's simple and straight forward, the supplements are tested and proof is provided that he/she inadvertently ingested a banned substance, as long as it wasn't on the label.

Someone please tell me how it was shown that a steak Contador ate last July was tested for Clenbuterol (a substance banned in cattle in the EU). How can proof even be provided that shows he inadvertently ingested a banned product from this beef? Just for the sake of argument, if Clenbuterol is banned from use on Cattle in the EU what percentage of beef from France or Spain contain Clenbuterol (should be 0%).

There is no way I believe any sort of burden of proof was met in this case. I think someone dropped a chain. Maybe Floyd Landis and his outrageous claims aren't so crazy.