Antonio Rigozzi (doping law professor) says laws were flouted in LA/USASA case - Page 4 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-01-12, 16:45
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterRider View Post
I disagree, I think this is much more humiliating. Now everyone knows he did it, and he's stuck saying he didn't which makes him look like a complete fool.

And that will be his legacy, that he is a fool.
Just meant that it would look ridiculous to go around still claiming that he's a 4-time TdF winner (or whatever) when he's been stripped of several of his wins for doping. It would look pathetic trying to cling to those "wins" when no one would believe that they were any cleaner than the ones that were stripped. Kind of like Riis still being a TdF "winner".
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-01-12, 17:03
arjanh arjanh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by babastooey View Post
I asked before in another thread, but I don't think I got an answer. I believe I have read on this website that the 8 year length of statute of limitations is in the WADA Code. Do I have that correct?
Yes, it does. No case older than 8 years old may lead to a case.

If you read the charging letter, all the charges happened less than 8 years ago. They may have started before that, but they lasted until within this 8 year period. I don't think USADA violated the 8 year SOL, but IANAL.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-01-12, 17:04
workingclasshero's Avatar
workingclasshero workingclasshero is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 131313 View Post
I guess you're right... Which is the first thing I did when I read this article, to get an idea of the perspective from which it was coming. It took about 30 seconds. The question is, why did I actually have to do this? This is the sort of thing which needs to be included in the article, to give context to the statement.

Every time I try to give Cyclingnews the benefit of the doubt, they prove me wrong with their lameness.
good work boys
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-01-12, 17:13
Raul Ramaya Raul Ramaya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 59
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 131313 View Post
I guess you're right... Which is the first thing I did when I read this article, to get an idea of the perspective from which it was coming. It took about 30 seconds. The question is, why did I actually have to do this? This is the sort of thing which needs to be included in the article, to give context to the statement. Every time I try to give Cyclingnews the benefit of the doubt, they prove me wrong with their lameness.
Thank you! 'twas my thought as well...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-01-12, 18:06
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 131313 View Post
I guess you're right... Which is the first thing I did when I read this article, to get an idea of the perspective from which it was coming. It took about 30 seconds. The question is, why did I actually have to do this? This is the sort of thing which needs to be included in the article, to give context to the statement.

Every time I try to give Cyclingnews the benefit of the doubt, they prove me wrong with their lameness.
CyclingNews are not journalists.

They are paste and copy merchants. Dont be fooled that they are interested in balance!
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-01-12, 18:18
frenchfry's Avatar
frenchfry frenchfry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bourgogne
Posts: 1,729
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Queued View Post
Rigozzi must be itching to get on that Lance Armstrong legal advisor gravy train.

A fool and his money...

How long 'til Lance hits pavement?

Dave.
Howard Jacobs appears to have missed that train as well. Not "thuggish" enough?
__________________
"C'est une triste chose de songer que la nature parle et que le genre humain n'ecoute pas" - Victor Hugo
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-01-12, 18:58
zigmeister zigmeister is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsut4392 View Post
What a dope.

What does he think the acronym "WADA" stands for? I thought it was "World Anti Doping Agency", but he thinks it seems to be "World standing up for supporting precedence in Anti-Doping rulings Agency". Although the WADA statutes mention respecting the rights of athletes, it's a serious bit of extrapolation to suggest WADA should be defending an obviously guilty athlete purely for procedural reasons, in contravention of every principle behind the existence of the organization.

Touting for business probably: "even when everyone knows you're guilty, I'm happy to take your money to explore possibilities of getting you off on a technicality"
Your comments pretty much summarized every reason colonist left to the US to start a new country, then start a country with better principles and rights to the citizen.

Thank god the courts of law and the US Constitution have to do the opposite of what you state.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-01-12, 19:18
131313's Avatar
131313 131313 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,094
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benotti69 View Post
CyclingNews are not journalists.

They are paste and copy merchants. Dont be fooled that they are interested in balance!
As I said, I keep giving them the benefit of the doubt....and they keep making me feel stupid... I guess it's because I keep making the mistake of "well, it's better than Velonews". When it comes to CN I'm about to become as cynical as MrsJohnMurphy!
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-01-12, 19:21
cathulu cathulu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 123
Default

Context is everything...
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-03-12, 09:39
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 131313 View Post
I guess you're right... Which is the first thing I did when I read this article, to get an idea of the perspective from which it was coming. It took about 30 seconds. The question is, why did I actually have to do this? This is the sort of thing which needs to be included in the article, to give context to the statement.

Every time I try to give Cyclingnews the benefit of the doubt, they prove me wrong with their lameness.
This is CN all over. You see this time and time again, whenever a pro-Armstrong statement is made it is never contextualised or corrected. For example Contador claiming there is no new evidence against Armstrong.

However, if someone makes a statement against Armstrong/UCI etc then you can be sure that CN will make sure that it is edited and contextualised.

But are you really that surprised?
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.