Official lance armstrong thread, part 2 (from september 2012) - Page 257 - 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
  #2561  
Old 12-10-12, 23:46
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
All downhill from here.
The road to perdition.

Quote:
But David Koenigsberg, a whistleblower attorney at Menz Bonner & Komar in New York, said that may not be a strong defense. "If you take money from the federal government, you have to abide by the terms by which that money was given to you," he said. But Mr. Koenigsberg said that there is some legal precedent that would allow Mr. Armstrong and others named in the suit to argue for a lower penalty because of the benefit the Postal Service received.

Rebecca Katz, a whistleblower attorney at Motley Rice's New York office says Mr. Armstrong might be better off arguing that the Postal Service had knowledge of doping on the team. After all, there were several accusations of doping during the time of the sponsorship.

A Justice Department spokesman and a spokeswoman for the Postal Service's Office of the Inspector General declined to comment.

The newly released court documents offer a rare glimpse into Mr. Armstrong's legal and public-relations strategy during a tumultuous year in which he faced a federal criminal investigation and accusations from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. (USADA's report on the use of performance-enhancing drugs by Mr. Armstrong and his teammates led cycling's governing body to strip him of his Tour de France titles. Mr. Armstrong has denied doping in the past.)

According to the documents, Mr. Armstrong at first attempted to quash the subpoena, then considered sidestepping it by asserting his Fifth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment offers protections against self-incrimination, barring the government from forcing any person to be a witness against himself. At the time, Mr. Armstrong was facing a criminal investigation into his alleged use of performance enhancing drugs. The case was eventually dropped, allowing Mr. Armstrong to comply with the subpoena.

Robert Luskin, an attorney for Mr. Armstrong, said the subpoena put Mr. Armstrong in an unfair and difficult position. "It put Lance in a trick box where he would assert his Fifth Amendment rights because of the criminal investigation and then they would leak it to embarrass him," he said. "We thought that was improper," he said.

Because the criminal investigation was dropped in February, there was no need for Mr. Armstrong to assert his Fifth Amendment rights. After Mr. Armstrong complied with the subpoena this fall, his lawyers fought vigorously to keep the court record sealed from public view. Mr. Armstrong's lawyer, John Keker, warned that if the public found out that Mr. Armstrong had "intended to assert his Fifth Amendment rights," that it would "further damage Mr. Armstrong's reputation."

The Justice Department, however, wanted the court records made public. "The sealing of judicial records is not appropriate," it wrote, "if it is done merely to protect parties from embarrassment."
Reply With Quote
  #2562  
Old 12-11-12, 00:22
sittingbison's Avatar
sittingbison sittingbison is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 2,131
Default

This for me is one of the most interesting aspects, and says a lot about our speculation about the motives of Birotte Jnr:
Quote:
According to the documents, Mr. Armstrong at first attempted to quash the subpoena, then considered sidestepping it by asserting his Fifth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment offers protections against self-incrimination, barring the government from forcing any person to be a witness against himself. At the time, Mr. Armstrong was facing a criminal investigation into his alleged use of performance enhancing drugs. The case was eventually dropped, allowing Mr. Armstrong to comply with the subpoena
If Birotte did not unceremoniously drop the FDA investigation with zero warning against the advice of Novitzky et al, Lance was doomed. Birotte has some serious questions to answer.
__________________
Quote:
“Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves Moriarty? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”
Reply With Quote
  #2563  
Old 12-11-12, 01:04
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

Hmmm.

RaceRadio calls it again. That dude's win/loss percentage is ridiculous.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #2564  
Old 12-11-12, 01:07
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sittingbison View Post
This for me is one of the most interesting aspects, and says a lot about our speculation about the motives of Birotte Jnr:


If Birotte did not unceremoniously drop the FDA investigation with zero warning against the advice of Novitzky et al, Lance was doomed. Birotte has some serious questions to answer.
Yeah. I think this was patently obvious from the time the suit was dropped. Look to Feinstein and Bill Clinton as the sponsors leading to Birotte's decision.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #2565  
Old 12-11-12, 01:33
Ninety5rpm's Avatar
Ninety5rpm Ninety5rpm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The World
Posts: 1,806
Default

It's hard to keep track!

So, this is not the original Justice Dept case being re-opened, but Landis' whistle blower case moving ahead, right?

Armstrong will be forced to testify in that case?
Reply With Quote
  #2566  
Old 12-11-12, 01:42
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninety5rpm View Post
It's hard to keep track!

So, this is not the original Justice Dept case being re-opened, but Landis' whistle blower case moving ahead, right?

Armstrong will be forced to testify in that case?
This is the WB case, yes. Appears to be the same guys who welcomed Hog to the ToC this year.
Reply With Quote
  #2567  
Old 12-11-12, 01:54
Ninety5rpm's Avatar
Ninety5rpm Ninety5rpm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The World
Posts: 1,806
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
Appears to be the same guys who welcomed Hog to the ToC this year.
"This year" 2012? Who was that?
Reply With Quote
  #2568  
Old 12-11-12, 01:58
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninety5rpm View Post
"This year" 2012? Who was that?
Quote:
Although the federal investigation into Lance Armstrong and others involved in the US Postal Service team officially came to a close on February 3rd due to a ruling by United States Attorney Andre Birotte Jr., there are indications from California that efforts to work out exactly what took place within the team may not be at an end.

A source with knowledge of the matter has told VeloNation that RadioShack Nissan manager Johan Bruyneel was served a subpoena by federal agents when he arrived in the USA midweek.

Bruyneel was apparently summoned to meet with investigators yesterday.

Repeated attempts to contact the RadioShack Nissan squad today about the matter have gone unanswered, but a response has been sought from the team.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/11...stigators.aspx
Reply With Quote
  #2569  
Old 12-11-12, 02:54
MarkvW's Avatar
MarkvW MarkvW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninety5rpm View Post
It's hard to keep track!

So, this is not the original Justice Dept case being re-opened, but Landis' whistle blower case moving ahead, right?

Armstrong will be forced to testify in that case?
Landis' whistle-blower case is still in limbo. It appears that the feds have neither taken it nor rejected it.
__________________
May 20, 2010: Floyd tells truth.
June 10, 2010: Floyd files qui tam.
Reply With Quote
  #2570  
Old 12-11-12, 03:28
spetsa's Avatar
spetsa spetsa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle
Posts: 452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkvW View Post
Landis' whistle-blower case is still in limbo. It appears that the feds have neither taken it nor rejected it.
Either way, LA can not be happy about these new media reports. It will be interesting to see if there is any PR in response. I bet we see photos of wonder dad volunteering at a soup kitchen with the family at Christmas or something similar. His ability to get away with supplying his typical arrogant response just took another hit.
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 19:49.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.