Floyd to be charged with fraud

[BotanyBay]

Don't you ever question the manner in which I provide freedom again.

You forgot something:

 

[MarkvW]

For the record I like Tyler and admire him. HOWEVER, he did exactly the same thing as Floyd. Book, fund, fought it. etc etc. What's the difference? They both came clean. In fact Floyd came clean first. Tyler himself admits he wouldn't have come clean if they Feds hadn't come knocking. Floyd voluntarily confessed.
Now I really don't understand where you're coming from. Consistency is all I seek here.

I'll revise my opinion of Tyler downward then. He's just another scumbag who didn't pay back the people he cheated.

 

[MarkvW]

So Floyd still has a debt to pay?
Even though he was caught, sanctioned, fined and spent 2 years suspended.


So if you have such scorn for Lance then why is it you cannot answer the simple question of should he pay back everyone who bought his fraudulent book?
Unlike Floyd, he certainly is in a position to pay it.


This just makes your inconsistent stances even more bizarre.

I like being bizarre. Especially when I'm being sincere. Flame on, Vortex-Man.

 

[TERMINATOR]

Yeah I tend to agree, except for maybe the people who paid $500 for the autographed "Winning Fair and Square" posters:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070430032117/http://www.floydfairnessfund.org/store.php

Of course that speaks to what your definition of fair and square is when it comes to cycling.

The rest of the FFF site does generally back up the claim that he was fighting against unsubstantiated claims and an unfair process instead of assertively declaring innocence but I'm sure if somebody really wanted to they could find interviews or forum posts he made or FFF event videos where Floyd claimed he didn't dope. I know he said it under oath at his USADA hearing.

The main reason I'd guess this turns out bad for Floyd is simply because of the bad mojo that seems to surround him, everything he touches cycling-related winds up crashing and burning. But maybe his luck changes this time.

It doesn't matter that Floyd was not being honest in his innocence. That cannot be the basis upon which a fraud charge can be leveled. In order to charge Floyd with fraud, you'd have to show the money was diverted for some other purpose other than his defense (i.e. like to pay his mortgage or something). Simply saying he was claiming innocence is not the definition of fraud because a reasonable person would have to assume he could be lying and guilty. No court will ever go along with the fact that a defendant who is actually guilty and claims innocence during their trial is engaging in a fraud. For one, it was USADA's burden to prove it and Floyd was not legally obligated to accede in the process. That's not considered fraud.

 

[TERMINATOR]

I agree. Just what Floyd said and wrote to induce people to contribute to the Fund is vitally important, as well as what Floyd knew about what other Fund participants were saying.

If it was all about contributing to fight for a fair process, it's looking good for Floyd. If it was about giving money to vindicate the clean athlete, it's looking bad.

You're both wrong. In order for the AUSA to prove fraud, he would have to show the money was not going to Floyd's defense. He would have to show the money was going to pay off lavish parties or vacations. Whether or not Floyd was actually innocent is legally irrelevant.

Please don't make me have to come back in here and repeat myself. You saw what I did to that police station in California, right?

I'll be back.

 

[Digger]

Digger, 1st, be nice. Second, my position is not untenable.

He's already a proven liar. Admitting to actually using the substance they accuse him of using would subject him to the possibility of prosecution. But, he wants to show that he's "done with all the crap". So, how does one atone for his sins without going to jail? Simple: Admit to different sins. Everyone walks away happy, right? Certainly you do.

What has he gained? He can't have the spoils that he has worked so hard to have gained (even WITH the illicit help), and he can't even blackmail his way back into bad-boy-land again. He loses his big house, gets kicked to the curb by his wife and has to retreat up into the mountains to even have a bed to sleep on. He can't even keep it together riding for Bahati's rickety-rack team. Meanwhile, he looks up and sees a G4 rocking its wings back and forth as it flies overhead (That's Lance saying F-U on his way back to Aspen...and who knows, it might be Floyd's ex helping cause that wing-rock... Lance has a reputation for doing that to the wives of rivals).
What has he gained? Sticking it back to his biggest partner-in-crime PUTZ.

"Oh, I used Testosterone, but not THAT day." (gee, you only tested frigging POSITIVE FOR IT)

"Oh, I was full of extra RBCs, but they never caught me for that"... Doesn't help you at all, Floyd.

Ever consider this?... Floyd was such a past abuser of testosterone that his body quite possibly quit producing it naturally, forcing him to use daily "maintenance" doses just to be "normal" (chemically). But perhaps his body kicked back a little "spike" that day, causing the testers to zoom-in and have a look at what his body's testoserone was actually MADE OF. remember, in the rationalizing mind of a doper, that "maintenance dose" would not be considered "doping" in his mind. He probably thought he was at baseline levels, so he was "OK" as far as cheating.

Floyd's ****ed that he got caught cheating for the drug he never expected to get caught cheating with.

And next time you read his NYVELOCITY interview, follow it up with his Pepperdine saga. Oh right, I'm sure you believe that Floyd had nothing to do with that phone call to Greg. Like I said, you're so desperate for the truth, that you'll swallow any morsel you can get and automatically believe it.

Well considering even Greg has said Floyd phoned him and apologised for this call...you're wrong there yet again.


The rest of your post is all conjecture, speculation and not worth replying to. Not even WADA, or the CAS came out with that tripe, and they convicted him.

 

[Digger]

I'll revise my opinion of Tyler downward then. He's just another scumbag who didn't pay back the people he cheated.

And Lance? Do you think he should give back people the money they spent on his books? The people who bought those books thinking he came back from cancer and won clean.

Must be hard being your friend though if you're this easily swayed in your opinion of them. Up and down daily. They must be a nervous wreck. You really want our pounds of flesh...
And you can say stop bringing Lance into this all you want, but Lance is continuing to give false hope to people. He continues to sell this story of coming back from the dead winning clean. People have donated on this basis. People have bought books on this basis. Why shouldn't he repay?

 

[Merckx index]

George Zimmerman, recently released on bail in the Trayvon Martin murder case, has admitted he took in more than $200,000 for his legal defense on an internet site. (This despite the fact that his parents told the judge they would have trouble coming up with the $15,000 needed to pay a bondsman for his $150,000 bail.) I guess now he will be unable to make a plea deal of any kind in which he admits he did not act purely in self-defense, because according to many in this forum, he would be committing fraud. Asking for money for a legal defense when you know you committed a crime. Even though i strongly suspect that many of the donors to Zimmerman think he might have been guilty in some sense, and still support him.

I suppose someone could argue that even if Zimmerman is guilty and knows he is, the legal defense is still necessary in order to get the most favorable possible sentence. But in light of Contador's decision, one could say the same thing about a doping charge. Though Bert got two years in principle, it was actually a little less, allowing him to ride the Vuelta. Also, if not for the aggressive arguments of Bert's lawyers, the final decision might not have been supplement contamination, which though it didn't affect the length of the suspension, did help salvage Bert's reputation. Floyd could make the same argument, that though he knew he was guilty, he needed expensive lawyers to help him get the best possible decision.

 

[Digger]

I'll read the kimmage interview again. I'll see if my mind is changed.

My current thoughts are that Floyd has always had the opportunity to be more forthcoming than he has been. He may have given Kimmage 7 hours of his time, but he's given very few hours to anyone since then.

Armstrong's case is dead. Still not a peep. Not good.

I missed this yesterday...the Kimmage interview was in so much detail. It would take you two to three hours to read.
Secondly all the answers are in this interview. Why does he have to keep rehashing it? Thirdly would it ever occur to you that he was instructed by the Feds and his lawyers not to keep giving out these interviews?

Again you keep saying he could have been more forthcoming, other posters are saying he could have given a limited confession.

 

[Digger]

Again, no. You're getting the auxiliary verbs confused. "Could", not "should". I said what I think he should have done several times, but you guys ignored it because it didn't fit your LANCELANCELANCE narrative.

Yes it was nonsense.

 

[Digger]

LOL. You are the one saying he didn't have the checkbook so there was no fraud committed by FL. Sheesh man you are so shell shocked you can't even back up what you are saying when I ridicule it or call you on it. I'm sorry I have made you this way today...I really am.

Here's a peace offering...if you stop posting whack takes I will stop attacking them. Deal?

Is that really all I am saying?!!! I used that as one example in direct response to an earlier point made. So stop using it out of context.

Firstly there's a number of reasons I feel a fraud hasn't taken place. He used the funds to pay lawyers. He feels and felt he wasn't treated fairly. This is what he said he would do. Did he use these funds to lead a lavish lifestyle. I think even you would agree that isn't the case.
Obviously he doped, but from the way he was notified of the test result, right up until the CAS hearing, there were serious issues. The lab did not behave impeccably for example. So where's the fraud?

 

[Digger]

I don't even insist that Floyd pay his victims back--just that he actually work hard at it. Even if it means working at McDonald's .

Tyler is a bit different from Floyd. He could have totally Hincapied, but he didn't. And Tyler wasn't hunting for the big score on Lance, like Floyd--he was just telling the truth without strings. And Tyler didn't defraud his fans of hundreds of thousands of dollars. And, to me, Tyler seemed sincere. Tyler has done everything he reasonably could to make it right.
The argument over the meaning of the word 'liar' does not interest me. Floyd still has a debt to pay and I want him to pay it.

I genuinely only came across this post now.
Your hatred of Floyd comes shining through and is blinding you. Tyler seemed sincere you say. It could be argued that going on 60 minutes wasn't sincere. (I believe he was by the way). It's amazing to watch human physchology. The way people construct arguments to fit their own preconceived hypothesis. Tyler being ok for example, eventhough he did the same thing. And Tyler not even volunteering his evidence like Floyd. Floyd woeked with USADA for months, unlike Tyler. How can you say he has done everything to make it right?

In relation to the word liar...interesting it doesn't interest you when you are the one labelling people one.

 

[ChrisE]

Is that really all I am saying?!!! I used that as one example in direct response to an earlier point made. So stop using it out of context.

Firstly there's a number of reasons I feel a fraud hasn't taken place. He used the funds to pay lawyers. He feels and felt he wasn't treated fairly. This is what he said he would do. Did he use these funds to lead a lavish lifestyle. I think even you would agree that isn't the case.
Obviously he doped, but from the way he was notified of the test result, right up until the CAS hearing, there were serious issues. The lab did not behave impeccably for example. So where's the fraud?

You are arguing a point that I agree with personally. Even if FL took funds knowing he was guilty, and used them entirely for his defense, I do not feel it should be fraud. This was discussed at length earlier in this thread, and MI is making this argument again. But, I am no lawyer and some people upthread recently cited some examples were similar actions were prosecuted as fraud.

So, it doesn't matter what you or I feel. Also, you as well as Terminator have zero idea if all the funds were used for his defense. To claim omniscience about people you don't know and situations you are not even remotely privy to seems a little silly, doesn't it?

The main issue in this forum is that people speak in absolutes. People don't know **** about a person they are not around for long periods of time, but forum members put forth an opinion like they are sleeping and living with them 24/7.

The fact you jump up and down and scream FL hasn't done wrong and is telling the whole truth in an interview is folly. You don't know that, and BB makes some very good points upthread. You are hooking your horse up and staking your reputation in here to somebody that has a pretty ****ty track record. Have fun with that.

 

[MarkvW]

I genuinely only came across this post now.
Your hatred of Floyd comes shining through and is blinding you. Tyler seemed sincere you say. It could be argued that going on 60 minutes wasn't sincere. (I believe he was by the way). It's amazing to watch human physchology. The way people construct arguments to fit their own preconceived hypothesis. Tyler being ok for example, eventhough he did the same thing. And Tyler not even volunteering his evidence like Floyd. Floyd woeked with USADA for months, unlike Tyler. How can you say he has done everything to make it right?

In relation to the word liar...interesting it doesn't interest you when you are the one labelling people one.

Okay. I have personal flaws. I guess you've resolved that. Still, Floyd defrauded people and there is a price that he should still pay.

 

[Digger]

You are arguing a point that I agree with personally. Even if FL took funds knowing he was guilty, and used them entirely for his defense, I do not feel it should be fraud. This was discussed at length earlier in this thread, and MI is making this argument again. But, I am no lawyer and some people upthread recently cited some examples were similar actions were prosecuted as fraud.

So, it doesn't matter what you or I feel. Also, you as well as Terminator have zero idea if all the funds were used for his defense. To claim omniscience about people you don't know and situations you are not even remotely privy to seems a little silly, doesn't it?

The main issue in this forum is that people speak in absolutes. People don't know **** about a person they are not around for long periods of time, but forum members put forth an opinion like they are sleeping and living with them 24/7.

The fact you jump up and down and scream FL hasn't done wrong and is telling the whole truth in an interview is folly. You don't know that, and BB makes some very good points upthread. You are hooking your horse up and staking your reputation in here to somebody that has a pretty ****ty track record. Have fun with that.

Show me where I said he did nothing wrong.

Second, the fact that his story has been corroborated, and that the Feds deemed it detailed enough to investigate, should say something.

HIs track record...again almost word for word his story has been corroborated by others...but maybe they all gathered around and practised their lines.

 

[ChrisE]

Show me where I said he did nothing wrong.

Excuse me? You haven't been on this thread the last few days arguing he should not be indicted for fraud? You are beginning to act like the hog, tossing out assinine posts that are either trolling or reflect poorly on your state of mind. Which is it?

Second, the fact that his story has been corroborated, and that the Feds deemed it detailed enough to investigate, should say something.

Which story has been corroborated? Are you going back on the LA tangent, implying that you have intimate details about the sealed GJ procedings?

Yes, TH basically said the same thing. Yes, we all agree there is truth in what they are saying about USPS. You leave out his motivations, and his selective memory loss, and his "I took everything except test" bs. You basically say "It's all there, he shouldn't be looked at with skepticism about anything inre to LA or anything he has said since May 2010". You apply this criteria when you wouldn't apply it to everyday life, only because of one thing.

 

[thehog]

You are arguing a point that I agree with personally. Even if FL took funds knowing he was guilty, and used them entirely for his defense, I do not feel it should be fraud. This was discussed at length earlier in this thread, and MI is making this argument again. But, I am no lawyer and some people upthread recently cited some examples were similar actions were prosecuted as fraud.

So, it doesn't matter what you or I feel. Also, you as well as Terminator have zero idea if all the funds were used for his defense. To claim omniscience about people you don't know and situations you are not even remotely privy to seems a little silly, doesn't it?

The main issue in this forum is that people speak in absolutes. People don't know **** about a person they are not around for long periods of time, but forum members put forth an opinion like they are sleeping and living with them 24/7.

The fact you jump up and down and scream FL hasn't done wrong and is telling the whole truth in an interview is folly. You don't know that, and BB makes some very good points upthread. You are hooking your horse up and staking your reputation in here to somebody that has a pretty ****ty track record. Have fun with that.

Oh Chris have we not talked about this before?

There are you telling the world about why the Feds dropped the case because of not wanting to get crazy Betsy on the stand but when we come to Floyd none of us really know who he is and his motivations? And we can't know what he really did with all that money. Because we weren't with him 24 x 7 ??!! When is it ok for you to know everything but everyone else doesn't?

Chris. Seriously. You need to calm down. I really want you to think about what your write next time. I can't save you from your own stupidity.

You have really do have no idea.

 

[Digger]

Excuse me? You haven't been on this thread the last few days arguing he should not be indicted for fraud? You are beginning to act like the hog, tossing out assinine posts that are either trolling or reflect poorly on your state of mind. Which is it?



Which story has been corroborated? Are you going back on the LA tangent, implying that you have intimate details about the sealed GJ procedings?

Yes, TH basically said the same thing. Yes, we all agree there is truth in what they are saying about USPS. You leave out his motivations, and his selective memory loss, and his "I took everything except test" bs. You basically say "It's all there, he shouldn't be looked at with skepticism about anything inre to LA or anything he has said since May 2010". You apply this criteria when you wouldn't apply it to everyday life, only because of one thing.

You speak about people talking in absolutes, yet you come out with these assumptions and absolutes about me.
Never once did I say Floyd never did anything wrong. Never once. I don't believe he should be charged with fraud. I don't believe he has been treated fairly. But he is human, like you and I.
So why would be volunteer all this information to the Feds and risk prison time by lying or having selective memory loss?
You talk about motivations...why talk to USADA for months in private before going public? Why volunteer to blow Rock racing apart? Why work with Ashenden?

By the way, he admits taking testosterone. Get that straight.

 

[ChrisE]

You speak about people talking in absolutes, yet you come out with these assumptions and absolutes about me.
Never once did I say Floyd never did anything wrong. Never once. I don't believe he should be charged with fraud. I don't believe he has been treated fairly. But he is human, like you and I.
So why would be volunteer all this information to the Feds and risk prison time by lying or having selective memory loss?
You talk about motivations...why talk to USADA for months in private before going public? Why volunteer to blow Rock racing apart? Why work with Ashenden?

By the way, he admits taking testosterone. Get that straight.

You knew what I meant about the T in terms of his soul cleansing inre to the AAF, so stop being obtuse.

What's this 'never' issue that has you all worked up? To clarify, you have been saying he has done nothing wrong in terms of fraud. I say back to you that you don't know that, because (1) we all can't come to an agreement in here if soliciting funds knowing he was guility is fraud and (2) none of us knows the details of the accountability of all of the funds.

You and I agree that in our opinion (if we were making the laws), if the funds he solicited for his defense were used exactly for that, then in our opinion that should not be fraud. I do not know this to be a fact under the law. You and I diverge when I say who knows if the funds were used for that. You have faith that they were, but you have no idea if that is true or not. How you come to that conclusion is a mystery to me, unless it involves faith. I am not a religious person so maybe that is where I fall down here. You say he "has not been treated fairly". For example?

All of this does not take into account the sleeziness of FFF and the blatancy, FL's actions prior to May 2010, etc. but you have already worked that out with yourself. I am not so quick unpinch my nose.

IMO he blabbed about all of his past not taking into account all the aspects of fraud. I am sure he had lawyer advice but who knows if the discussion took place about how funds were accounted for. He saw whistle blower $, future tell-all books etc, and a chance to get back at LA for the RS snub. And, who knows what kind of bad blood is going on behind the scenes that you, even in all your omniscience and faith, are unaware of. YMMV.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You are arguing a point that I agree with personally. Even if FL took funds knowing he was guilty, and used them entirely for his defense, I do not feel it should be fraud. This was discussed at length earlier in this thread, and MI is making this argument again. But, I am no lawyer and some people upthread recently cited some examples were similar actions were prosecuted as fraud.

So, it doesn't matter what you or I feel. Also, you as well as Terminator have zero idea if all the funds were used for his defense. To claim omniscience about people you don't know and situations you are not even remotely privy to seems a little silly, doesn't it?

The main issue in this forum is that people speak in absolutes. People don't know **** about a person they are not around for long periods of time, but forum members put forth an opinion like they are sleeping and living with them 24/7.

The fact you jump up and down and scream FL hasn't done wrong and is telling the whole truth in an interview is folly. You don't know that, and BB makes some very good points upthread. You are hooking your horse up and staking your reputation in here to somebody that has a pretty ****ty track record. Have fun with that.

You just broke the irony machine with that statement.

As for Floyd, if he ( or they) misappropriated the funds or put it to use other than to support his defense then they deserve to be pursued and charged.
However there is nothing to suggest that has happened, which is why currently, it seems petty and vindictive.

 

[Digger]

You knew what I meant about the T in terms of his soul cleansing inre to the AAF, so stop being obtuse.

What's this 'never' issue that has you all worked up? To clarify, you have been saying he has done nothing wrong in terms of fraud. I say back to you that you don't know that, because (1) we all can't come to an agreement in here if soliciting funds knowing he was guility is fraud and (2) none of us knows the details of the accountability of all of the funds.

You and I agree that in our opinion (if we were making the laws), if the funds he solicited for his defense were used exactly for that, then in our opinion that should not be fraud. I do not know this to be a fact under the law. You and I diverge when I say who knows if the funds were used for that. You have faith that they were, but you have no idea if that is true or not. How you come to that conclusion is a mystery to me, unless it involves faith. I am not a religious person so maybe that is where I fall down here. You say he "has not been treated fairly". For example?

All of this does not take into account the sleeziness of FFF and the blatancy, FL's actions prior to May 2010, etc. but you have already worked that out with yourself. I am not so quick unpinch my nose.

IMO he blabbed about all of his past not taking into account all the aspects of fraud. I am sure he had lawyer advice but who knows if the discussion took place about how funds were accounted for. He saw whistle blower $, future tell-all books etc, and a chance to get back at LA for the RS snub. And, who knows what kind of bad blood is going on behind the scenes that you, even in all your omniscience and faith, are unaware of. YMMV.

Cleared. I believe you are wrong.

Examples of him being treated unfairly...right. David Walsh a fervent anti doping writer even conceded that the lab was 'incredibly sloppy.'
The timing of Floyd being let know...others knew before him, journalists etc etc. Also compare his positive to Lance's positive or Alberto's positive. Alberto's only came to light after three months when the Germans got the story.
The CAS arbitrators in the case were handpicked by the prosecution, thus weighing strongly in their favour. Floyd's side had little or no input into deciding these guys, which is fair enough, but neither should the prosecution.

Testers in the lab for example never wrote down how they came to such a result in the test...basic science for dummies...so Floyd's team was unable to correlate the results using the same method.
Look not one person here is disputing Floyd doped. However, and paradoxically, there's serious anomalies in his case.
On a broader sense, the handpicking of CAS arbitrators by certain people in power, loads things against the athlete. Full disclosure of their backgrounds to the defense legal team is not being adhered to. That is not exclusive to Floyd Landis' case by the way.

 

[thehog]

Rather than getting too caught up in the contexts of lying. I like to concentrate on the truth for a moment.

I only know one guy in the face of adversity who was strong enough and against tremendous opposition who told the truth. That was Floyd. It was also the catalyst for Tyler to then tell the truth.

Although this is not a Lance thread he's still having a hard time confessing or even admitting to his drug use. He just pretends it never happened. I guess you could call him weak and hardly the inspiration he professes himself to be.

I prefer the truth especially when its served with a good dose of humility. Our world needs a little more of it and a littles less marketing.

Thanks Hog. Sometimes these threads get a little confusing and I don't even understand what’s being discussed.

But you're right though. Truth is golden.

 

[thehog]

Cleared. I believe you are wrong.

Examples of him being treated unfairly...right. David Walsh a fervent anti doping writer even conceded that the lab was 'incredibly sloppy.'
The timing of Floyd being let know...others knew before him, journalists etc etc. Also compare his positive to Lance's positive or Alberto's positive. Alberto's only came to light after three months when the Germans got the story.
The CAS arbitrators in the case were handpicked by the prosecution, thus weighing strongly in their favour. Floyd's side had little or no input into deciding these guys, which is fair enough, but neither should the prosecution.

Testers in the lab for example never wrote down how they came to such a result in the test...basic science for dummies...so Floyd's team was unable to correlate the results using the same method.
Look not one person here is disputing Floyd doped. However, and paradoxically, there's serious anomalies in his case.
On a broader sense, the handpicking of CAS arbitrators by certain people in power, loads things against the athlete. Full disclosure of their backgrounds to the defense legal team is not being adhered to. That is not exclusive to Floyd Landis' case by the way.

Excellent post. Even Lance believes the CAS trial was stacked. I think in time once the emotion boils down some of real truths will come out from that abortion.

--

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/...interview.html

Do you believe that Floyd Landis doped?

No. I think in a normal American court of law, he’s not guilty. Those arbitrations with USADA and CAS are tough. The arbitrators are in the business of arbitrating in favour of the anti-doping agencies. If I was a juror, I don’t think there was guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Anti-doping]

Chris. Seriously. You need to calm down. I really want you to think about what your write next time. I can't save you from your own stupidity.

You have really do have no idea.

***

Mods; can you please stop the trolling from Hog, RR etc?
We now knows that everything they said has been lies.
Please make this forum better.

Thank you!

 

[Merckx index]

Examples of him being treated unfairly...right. David Walsh a fervent anti doping writer even conceded that the lab was 'incredibly sloppy.'

I wouldn’t say it was incredibly sloppy, it was a little sloppy in places, though anyone who has worked in a lab knows that frequently there are deviations from strict following of procedure. There is no evidence that the sloppiness resulted in a positive that shouldn’t have been a positive. And CAS itself pointed out the sloppiness, and overturned the T/E.

The timing of Floyd being let know...others knew before him, journalists etc etc. Also compare his positive to Lance's positive or Alberto's positive. Alberto's only came to light after three months when the Germans got the story.

That is not Floyd being treated unfairly, that is Contador being treated unfairly. Just because Contador was handled with kid gloves doesn’t mean that Floyd should have been. He was treated as fairly as, say, Hamilton or Heras were.

The CAS arbitrators in the case were handpicked by the prosecution, thus weighing strongly in their favour. Floyd's side had little or no input into deciding these guys, which is fair enough, but neither should the prosecution.

Where did you get this idea? The CAS procedure is always the same. Each side picks one arb, then the two arbs agree on a third. This procedure was followed with Floyd’s case and also with Contador’s. If Floyd had no input in the panel, how did it happen that one of the panel members voted to acquit? And since Contador was found guilty, it’s kind of hard to argue that the composition of the panel helped him. In fact, one could argue that the evidence that Contador took a tainted supplement was not as good as the evidence that Floyd took synthetic T.

Testers in the lab for example never wrote down how they came to such a result in the test...basic science for dummies...so Floyd's team was unable to correlate the results using the same method.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to here, but the key evidence for synthetic testosterone was very clear. The chromatograph profiles were produced, and the peaks came out where they were supposed to come out. The o/oo values were very high for one metabolite, far too high to be explained by anything but a synthetic substance, and the values for one of the other metabolites were also very high. Plus, it came out in the CAS hearing that some of Floyd’s samples for other stages of that Tour also had very high values.

If your point is that LA and Contador both got preferential treatment, I won’t debate that. But all the delays and cover-ups didn’t help Contador in the end. LA, of course, is in a league of his own here. He may have had a positive covered up. But until and unless compelling evidence of this emerges, one really can’t compare Floyd and LA. One can only compare Floyd with other riders who officially tested positive, and in these comparisons, he was treated in the end no worse than anyone else.

Excellent post. Even Lance believes the CAS trial was stacked. I think in time once the emotion boils down some of real truths will come out from that abortion.

Oh, right, like LA is going to come out and say he thinks Floyd really was positive. For someone who has been so critical of LA, you are extraordinarily generous in attributing to him knowledge of what the panel should have done. LA didn't have a clue about the merits of the case, he was just taking the opportunity to diss the same French lab that caused him grief a couple of years earlier. Please.

Btw, Hog, care to provide a link for your assertion in another thread that the USADA investigation of LA is well underway? Or is this another of your “can’t reveal my sources” teases?