• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

FLandis letter, links

Page 16 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
A 60 Minutes spokesperson gave us this response:
Lance Armstrong was given every opportunity to appear on 60 Minutes but he and his lawyers consistently declined. We consider this investigation to be the most thoroughly researched report ever done on the use of performance enhancing drugs in cycling and our story, this Sunday at 7pm, will speak for itself.
Andreu says that once she realized they were serious and had done their homework, both she and Frankie agreed to be interviewed. It's not clear what, if any, material from their interviews will appear on Sunday's show.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/lance-armstrong-betsy-andreu-60minutes-2011-5#ixzz1Mvr8euK9
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
A

Anonymous

Guest
D-Queued said:
Thomas Weisel is getting increased attention.

Tech Financier Thomas Weisel Linked To Lance Armstrong Blood Doping Investigation

"The government is continuing to investigate the Lance Armstrong doping allegations, and it's not clear what their ultimate goal is. But it seems possible that, if Tyler Hamilton's story is accurate, and the Montgomery-Bell team did have a systematic doping program in the late 1990s, that Thomas Weisel might soon be facing some tough questions of his own."

And:

Lance Armstrong Doping Story Points Toward S.F. Company

"As a federal investigation continues, the way forward seems less clear for the owner of of the team that allegedly pressured Hamilton to make his choice."
Links from Weisel Thread
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
New York Times article from 2000.

By Selena Roberts
Published: December 03, 2000

Lance Armstrong may have a chance to clear his name now that France's sports minister has decided that she will not comply with a request from cycling's governing body to destroy Tour de France riders' frozen urine samples.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/03/sports/plus-cycling-armstrong-s-chance-to-clear-name.html

Also from late 2000
PARIS (AP) ? In a surprise reversal, the head of world cycling's governing body has called for the destruction of frozen urine samples from riders at the last summer's Tour de France.

"The samples have no further value and, as far as we are concerned, they should be destroyed," Hein Verbruggen, president of the International Cycling Union, was quoted as saying Friday in the French sports daily L'Equipe.
http://www.active.com/cycling/Artic...s__Casartelli_memorial_set_for_dedication.htm
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
Investigators in Lance Armstrong case have met with Swiss lab director over ‘suspicious’ test result in 2001

Martial Saugy, the Lausanne-based lab director, sought out anti-doping authorities last year shortly after Floyd Landis became the first cyclist to accuse Armstrong publicly, according to World Anti-Doping Agency Director General David Howman. In September, Saugy met with Jeff Novitzky, a special agent with the Food and Drug Administration who has led the U.S. government’s probe of Armstrong, at WADA’s Montreal headquarters. FBI and U.S. Anti-Doping Agency officials also attended the meeting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...result-in-2001/2011/05/26/AG8ZqKCH_story.html
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Howman clarifies that, contrary to repeated affirmations made by Verbruggen, the UCI did not send its samples (whether positivie or suspicious) to the WADA in 2001.

We were not in a position to do anything in 2001. Our rules didn’t come into affect until 2004. From 2004 onwards I can comment and what I can tell you in general is that when a new analysis comes out the labs operate cautiously when they have a positive and the step that we accept and know about is they say it’s suspicious and what we trust will happen is that the testing agency will go and collect another sample from the athlete and then they can say if they want to press on and are confident with the positive. They just want to be sure before they might have to go to a tribunal. We didn’t have that responsibility or jurisdiction in 2001.”
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-helped-with-novitzky-investigation


Moreover,
Dr. Maserati said:
As has been pointed out the Lab Director in 2001 was Laurent Rivier - Saugy did not take over until 2002.
This puts Saugy's denial (see Polish's post above) in a different light.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
Articles from around the USA regarding 60 Minutes Story:

“In the cold light of morning your story was either extraordinarily shoddy, to the point of being reckless and unprofessional, or a vicious hit-and-run job,” lawyer Elliot Peters wrote. Or both lol.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spo...ngs-lawyers-want-apology-from-60-minutes.html

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...lawyers-demand-on-air-apology-from-60-minutes

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...rom-60-minutes/2011/06/01/AGPiVEGH_story.html
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
official response from CBS to armstrong’s new lawyer demanding an apology
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/01/sportsline/main20068091.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

refutes armstrong's habitual 'i can’t recall' about meeting/not meeting the swiss lab director
…but after the broadcast he confirmed that the meeting took place. Mr. Armstrong, after our broadcast, said he couldn't recall that any such meeting took place.

debunks armstrong’s lawyer statements that there was no even a suspicious test at 2001 tds
…This was confirmed by a number of international officials who have linked the "suspicious" test to Armstrong.

exposes 3 easily verifiable attempts at obfuscating actual facts as if misreported by 60-min

They claimed that "60 Minutes" reported the meeting took place at the Swiss lab; they claimed that "60 Minutes" reported the meeting took place in 2001; and they claimed that "60 Minutes" said it was a "secret" meeting. All three are wrong.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
Visit site
Flip Flops on UCI's version of Armstrong Donation(s)

25 May 2010 - McQuaid interview with CyclingNews
He refused comparisons with a football team perhaps making a donation to a match referee but embarrassingly admitted that despite promising the $100,000 in April of 2002, Armstrong only paid up in 2005 after the UCI sent him a reminder of payment.

The President of the UCI Pat McQuaid has revealed that Lance Armstrong is the only rider ever to have made a donation to UCI and has admitted that in hindsight, the decision to accept $100,000 while the Texan was still racing was regrettable

25 May 2010 – McQuaid speaking to journalists at Giro

My understanding, without having examined the full detail, is that during 2002 Lance Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel visited the UCI headquarters in Aigle [Switzerland]. It had just opened in April 2002, it was some time after that. They got a guided tour of the centre. They were impressed by what they saw and Armstrong offered $100,000 to help the development of cycling.

"The UCI decided to use the money on a Sysmex machine, my understanding is that the machine cost around $88,000. We did nothing more about this until 2005 when it was realised that the money had not been paid by Armstrong. A phone call was made and the money came in.
10 July 2010 - McQuaid interview with CyclingNews

McQuaid showed Cyclingnews a photocopy of the invoice of the Sysmex blood testing machine that a large part of Armstrong $100,000 donation was used to buy. He refused to let us take a photograph of it, keeping it in a file marked 'Confidential'

"Armstrong said he paid $25,000 but I also knew he paid $100,000,” he added. “There was other speculation about amounts but they were way out. We've now found out exactly what was donated by looking at our records in detail. They show that Lance, in May 2002, paid a personal cheque, signed by himself and his wife, for $25,000. That went into the funds of what was then the Anti-Doping Council. They decide to use the money for anti-doping tests on juniors, to separate it from Armstrong, because he was racing at the time. We have record of the four or five races where special tests were done. It was all budgeted and paid for.

"Then in 2005, just at the time Armstrong retired, he promised $100,000. At that time we needed a Sysmex machine, so we ordered it and we paid for it based on the pledge he had made. Why it took him so long to eventually pay up I don't know, you'd have to ask him. It came from his company CSE. And the fact that the $100,000 came from CSE explains to me why he said $25,000. He may not have directly known about the later $100,000 donation.
"

8 June 2010 - Verbruggen

Verbruggen also addressed Armstrong's financial donation to the UCI in 2002, an issue which has raised questions of conflict of interest.

Verbruggen said Armstrong's agent approached the UCI and offered to make a donation for the fight against doping.

"This was discussed by our anti-doping people," Verbruggen said. "They said, 'We can't use this money for doping controls.' Then they said if Lance would agree that we buy a Sysmex for this, then that could be a good idea. I left it there. I have not been busy with it afterwards."

A Sysmex is a machine used for analyzing blood.

Verbruggen said the machine could be priced up to $85,000, but ended up costing between $51,000 and $60,000.

Verbruggen said he checked with the UCI in 2005 or 2006 to see if they had received the money.

"They had forgotten about it," he said. "Then they went after the money and they got it. That's the whole story.
"