Floyd to be charged with fraud

[rhubroma]

The American system is not the problem. It has been perverted by the population that takes pride in their stupidity. From the justice system ie their IMO ultimate unwillingness to find LA guilty if it had gone to trial (the reason I think it was canned), OJ, etc. to support of politicians and political parties that exhibit nothing but demagoguery about ideals that don't exist and are against their collective best interest. Things like FFF don't surprise me. Useful idiots across the board in this country, and FFF is just an example of the mindset of the sheep that will allow this country to ultimately fail.

Precisely, however, when the market determinants dictate how justice is administered, then the entire system is perverted.

In cases like these, he that has more money to spend on the most adept and sly legal team, as if court proceedings were like sport (whoever can finance the best athletes usually wins the championships), and who can corrupt the most politicians with donations, has “justice” on his side. When justice become economic and political, and it has here, then no justice is served.

 

[sniper]

The American system is not the problem. It has been perverted by the population that takes pride in their stupidity. From the justice system ie their IMO ultimate unwillingness to find LA guilty if it had gone to trial (the reason I think it was canned), OJ, etc. to support of politicians and political parties that exhibit nothing but demagoguery about ideals that don't exist and are against their collective best interest. Things like FFF don't surprise me. Useful idiots across the board in this country, and FFF is just an example of the mindset of the sheep that will allow this country to ultimately fail.



LOL. Let's just replace all 3 of those reasons with the main one....RS didn't give him a job in 2008. As I said when this whole ordeal started, that was the biggest mistake LA ever made. He should have kept a rogue like FL on his payroll forever.

The only people that would believe #3 are the type of rubes that would contribute to something like FFF.

well. it would explain why he hacked into the french anti-doping lab. Objectively (and without mockery), how would you explain that?
Also, he seemed to speak quite openly and frankly in the Kimmage interview. He spoke about all sorts of degrading stuff. Hell, he himself fully admitted the FFF was a joke and a mistake. There seemed to be little reason left for him to lie about the synthetic testosteron.

 

[ChrisE]

well. it would explain why he hacked into the french anti-doping lab. Objectively, how would you explain that? (Probably by claiming floyd is crazy? You can do better.)
Also, he seemed to speak quite openly and frankly in the Kimmage interview. He spoke about all sorts of degrading stuff. Hell, he himself fully admitted the FFF was a joke and a mistake. There seemed to be little reason left for him to lie about the synthetic testosteron.

The reason he denies taking test is the reason for this thread.....that denial will be used to shield him from this fraud. Yes, a staple PED of the modern doping cocktail was the lone PED not in his system. Right.

He admits FFF was a mistake alright, while from the other side of his mouth he denies taking the PED that he was using the money from FFF to fight. I can't think about this too much longer or that ruptured disk in my neck will get inflamed from the whiplash.

I have no idea why he would hack into the lab's computers if he was truly innocent of taking test. That would lead me to conclude that perhaps he wasn't that innocent after all. Desperate people do desperate things, like ridicule GL for being the victim of child abuse as if that would turn this whole ordeal into his favor.

I don't spend too much time thinking about the fluff that tends to obscure the facts. You can draw your own conclusions from how he "seems" in interviews. I prefer other methods, like deductive reasoning.

 

[ChrisE]

Precisely, however, when the market determinants dictate how justice is administered, then the entire system is perverted.

In cases like these, he that has more money to spend on the most adept and sly legal team, as if court proceedings were like sport (whoever can finance the best athletes usually wins the championships), and who can corrupt the most politicians with donations, has “justice” on his side. When justice become economic and political, and it has here, then no justice is served.

The market doesn't dictate anything if the population is educated. The population's tendency to be easily manipulated is the problem. Is the money the problem, or the stupidity of the people? I don't think this is chicken/egg.

You and I can figure this out. Why do the rubes who buy into the BS get a pass by being labelled a victim of moneyed infulences? The reason the best financed get off more than the poor is because the rich and powerful are able to cast seeds of doubt into the minds of the easily manipulated.

 

[AussieGoddess]

On the other hand, Lance's scam, for a scam is what we are dealing with, and on a far greater scale, has not only illicitly earned him millions, which he brazenly calls fund raising, but also elevated him to a kind of iconic status among those whom he insolently regards as the faithful. Yet those folks need no protection from him by the State about the same stupidity and presumptuousness for which Floyd's supporters now deserve remuneration. No doubt much of the income Lance has been able to fraudulently drawn from his "non-profit" foundation, so-called, has paid for his legal expenses, in the same way that those funds deceitfully raised by Landis are now the charges for which he is being brought back into court.

Brilliant!

Im not definding Lance by any means.

But because he is guilty and gets away with it, doesnt make Floyds offences any less. He is still guilty, and should be prosecuted for it.

 

[sniper]

The reason he denies taking test is the reason for this thread.....that denial will be used to shield him from this fraud. Yes, a staple PED of the modern doping cocktail was the lone PED not in his system. Right.

He admits FFF was a mistake alright, while from the other side of his mouth he denies taking the PED that he was using the money from FFF to fight. I can't think about this too much longer or that ruptured disk in my neck will get inflamed from the whiplash.

I have no idea why he would hack into the lab's computers if he was truly innocent of taking test. That would lead me to conclude that perhaps he wasn't that innocent after all. Desperate people do desperate things, like ridicule GL for being the victim of child abuse as if that would turn this whole ordeal into his favor.

I don't spend too much time thinking about the fluff that tends to obscure the facts. You can draw your own conclusions from how he "seems" in interviews. I prefer other methods, like deductive reasoning.

in the interview, Floyd merely says the doping test-results didn't make sense to him, that is, he himself wasn't able to account for the positive testosterone test and couldn'T reconcile it with a transfusion hypothesis. He admits to everything else (taking the testosterone prior to the tour, etc.).
Your deductive reasoning thus tells you that it all did make sense to Floyd after all and that he was lying by saying it didn't make sense to him? oh well, you'll know.

 

[rhubroma]

The market doesn't dictate anything if the population is educated. The population's tendency to be easily manipulated is the problem. Is the money the problem, or the stupidity of the people? I don't think this is chicken/egg.

You and I can figure this out. Why do the rubes who buy into the BS get a pass by being labelled a victim of moneyed infulences? The reason the best financed get off more than the poor is because the rich and powerful are able to cast seeds of doubt into the minds of the easily manipulated.

That people are generally more tolerant of the spectacle than decency should allow before the farce it has become is without a doubt, however, this only shows the extent to which their interests have prevailed over their critical discernment. That they willingly pay into it is appalling.

The only point upon which our conclusions don't coincide, however, is that you feel that the people's stupidity is exclusively at fault, the results thier just compensence; whereas I think that money has also corrupted the system beyond repair. This is the crucial systemic problem, and it is here where one needs to work.

 

[ChrisE]

Dude,
in the interview, Floyd merely says the doping test-results didn't make sense to him, that is, he himself wasn't able to account for the positive testosterone test and couldn'T reconcile it with a transfusion hypothesis. He admits to everything else (taking the testosterone prior to the tour, etc.).
Your deductive reasoning thus tells you that it all did make sense to Floyd after all and that he was lying by saying it didn't make sense to him? oh well, you'll know.

Then why did he say he would pay back the FFF money? The FFF money was used for his defense against AAF for synthetic testosterone at the TdF. So, if he didn't take it during the tour then why the remorse? He fought the AAF because it made no sense? What about all the other positives retroactive on his other samples in that tour? Did those make sense?

Why even go there about FFF if you didn't take it, and if it did not make any "sense" about it being residual from a transfusion. He wants to pay back (lol, I believe this payback is all self-pity BS) FFF for exactly what then? This is a ludicrous bunch of BS.

This is what makes no sense...if he didn't take it during the tour, then why hack the lab? Why would a person innocent of taking test during the tour feel remorse about taking money to fight that accusation and start hacking into computers, and ridicule GL?

If you say he feels remorse about the whole scenario and he should have just blown the lid off of the whole PED thing in 2006 by admitting, then he would have admitted to PED use for everything except what he got busted for lol. That's like getting a ticket for speeding, and as the cop is writing the ticket you "come clean" about the stash of coke in your glovebox. Seriously now.

Not saying you, because without spending time reviewing your past opinions I really don't recall where you fall in this tangled web of allegiance, but alot of you in here gloss over the facts surrounding FL just because he is an LA enemy.

People conveniently forget that he might still be keeping up the charade if LA would have given him a job in 2010. People conveniently forget the scorched earth policy and his allegiance to omerta and all the lying prior to 2010. People conveniently forget the solicitation of funds for his ludicrous defense. People conveniently forget what he did to GL.

Yes, LA is a powerful figure to be able to wipe the memory of the pious or gloss over the facts of FL's past and make sense out of his pretzel logic present, to put him into hero status.

 

[Digger]

I don't spend too much time thinking

You certainly don't.

 

[ChrisE]

The only point upon which our conclusions don't coincide, however, is that you feel that the people's stupidity is exclusively at fault, the results thier just compensence; whereas I think that money has also corrupted the system beyond repair. This is the crucial systemic problem, and it is here where one needs to work.

I understand your point, but this is why I alluded to chicken/egg. Was the money there waiting for the population to become stupid, or did the money appear on the scene when the population was shown to be easily manipulated?

Again, you and I have this figured out. Why do others get a pass for basically allowing this to happen by showing their susceptability? You said it yourself upthread about FFF....those idiots deserve what they get for donating. Doesn't a democracy deserve the same thing? If one truly believes in democracy then they trust the will of the people to eventually do the right thing. Unfortunately, more and more "the right thing" doesn't occur.

The only reason I am for campaign and lobbying reform is because the stupid can't see it for what it is. I don't have a problem with the basic philosophy because it would go by the wayside if it was happening within an educated society. An educated society solves most problems, and thus makes the need for reform and regulation in government unnecessary. This is why I think the basic problem here is the people, not the money.

And with that, I am off to the golf course with the rest of my white conservative friends. Take care rubarb...though we don't always agree I always enjoy your perspective. Besides, we are probably on the verge of getting *****-slapped for going so far off topic here.

Don't drink too much wine in your Roman cafe this evening.

 

[ChrisE]

You certainly don't.

Ouch, that hurts coming from somebody I totally respect.

How can I get back in your good graces? If I say FL walks on water is that a start?

 

[Race Radio]

The lesson here is simple, if you are going to commit fraud make it big. Conning the USPS out of millions ? No Problem. Taking $50 from Freds? Then you have problem

 

[rhubroma]

Im not definding Lance by any means.

But because he is guilty and gets away with it, doesnt make Floyds offences any less. He is still guilty, and should be prosecuted for it.

I realize this. My point was another, which goes beyond the mere black and white analysis you have provided that doesn't account for the specific instances, not as moral justification, but how the clash of egoisms work themselves out in larger events. In light of this, Lance's treatment rings as sinisterly ironic and is a darkness that looms not only over the entire judicial process in this sordid affair, but the moral consciousness of those who have always supported him.

Floyd will be made to face the verdict once again if things go accordingly and be ruined a second time. Is this justice? Perhaps. Perhaps less so in light of the other points I raised up-thread, my point. Whereas I have enough doubt in human justice to place too much faith in the merely straightforward (and superficial) verdicts. In other words Justice is too large a concept to confine to a simple he’s guilty and that’s it, also because justice and punishment, oh were this to be held clear in the minds of some, are not the same things.

 

[sniper]

Then why did he say he would pay back the FFF money? The FFF money was used for his defense against AAF for synthetic testosterone at the TdF. So, if he didn't take it during the tour then why the remorse? He fought the AAF because it made no sense? What about all the other positives retroactive on his other samples in that tour? Did those make sense?

Why even go there about FFF if you didn't take it, and if it did not make any "sense" about it being residual from a transfusion. He wants to pay back (lol, I believe this payback is all self-pity BS) FFF for exactly what then? This is a ludicrous bunch of BS.

This is what makes no sense...if he didn't take it during the tour, then why hack the lab? Why would a person innocent of taking test during the tour feel remorse about taking money to fight that accusation and start hacking into computers, and ridicule GL?

If you say he feels remorse about the whole scenario and he should have just blown the lid off of the whole PED thing in 2006 by admitting, then he would have admitted to PED use for everything except what he got busted for lol. That's like getting a ticket for speeding, and as the cop is writing the ticket you "come clean" about the stash of coke in your glovebox. Seriously now.

Not saying you, because without spending time reviewing your past opinions I really don't recall where you fall in this tangled web of allegiance, but alot of you in here gloss over the facts surrounding FL just because he is an LA enemy.

People conveniently forget that he might still be keeping up the charade if LA would have given him a job in 2010. People conveniently forget the scorched earth policy and his allegiance to omerta and all the lying prior to 2010. People conveniently forget the solicitation of funds for his ludicrous defense. People conveniently forget what he did to GL.

Yes, LA is a powerful figure to be able to wipe the memory of the pious or gloss over the facts of FL's past and make sense out of his pretzel logic present, to put him into hero status.

I'll be the last to rule out the possibility that Floyd was lying about the testosterone and did take it knowingly during the tour. So yes, that remains a possibility. The hacking, it would be interesting to hear some other posters' opinions about why he hacked the place and what he thought he could accomplish there, although probably its been discussed somewhere before.

 

[andy1234]

The lesson here is simple, if you are going to commit fraud make it big. Conning the USPS out of millions ? No Problem. Taking $50 from Freds? Then you have problem

Very true, scale is the only difference here.
Landis commited just about every offence that Armstrong is accused of.
Intimidation, perjury, fraud etc etc.

Crying about fairness should be reserved for those who are entitled to fairness.

 

[rhubroma]

I understand your point, but this is why I alluded to chicken/egg. Was the money there waiting for the population to become stupid, or did the money appear on the scene when the population was shown to be easily manipulated?

Again, you and I have this figured out. Why do others get a pass for basically allowing this to happen by showing their susceptability? You said it yourself upthread about FFF....those idiots deserve what they get for donating. Doesn't a democracy deserve the same thing? If one truly believes in democracy then they trust the will of the people to eventually do the right thing. Unfortunately, more and more "the right thing" doesn't occur.

The only reason I am for campaign and lobbying reform is because the stupid can't see it for what it is. I don't have a problem with the basic philosophy because it would go by the wayside if it was happening within an educated society. An educated society solves most problems, and thus makes the need for reform and regulation in government unnecessary. This is why I think the basic problem here is the people, not the money.

And with that, I am off to the golf course with the rest of my white conservative friends. Take care rubarb...though we don't always agree I always enjoy your perspective. Besides, we are probably on the verge of getting *****-slapped for going so far off topic here.

Don't drink too much wine in your Roman cafe this evening.

Ah don't get me started on democracy! And the people! In any case I rather see the problem as one of the example the bottom is given from the top: greed, mendacity, duplicity, hypocrisy, baseness, the only real "trickle-down" effect verified in recent times.

Your reading on Floyd in another post, while probably correct on certain accounts, I think should be mitigated in light of other circumstances which your arguments have not considered. For even if only out of sheer desperation and merely for personal gain, his attempts to bring to light the Truth, however, contradictory, is worthy of respect. I'm not saying praise, but respect yes.

Tomorrow I will be drinking some good prosecco with my pizza di pasqua and corelina and then Morelino di Scansano with my roast lamb and potates with garlic and rosemary.

 

[thehog]

Good post buuuuutttttt.....

These guys weren't donating for Floyd's innocence. The Average Joes were but the Champions Club donators weren't supporting what they thought was an innocence man slated by a dodgy French justice system. They were furthering their advancement in the Lance club. That's the only reason they stumped up money. Not for Floyd but to further advance up the Armstrong weekend riding gang.

I agree with AG. Floyd needs to face the law like everyone else including Lance. But he has one thing on his side and he won't need expensive lawyers - truth. He doesn't have a problem with telling it like it is and he doesn't fear jail.

I honestly believe its a no win for Armstrong in terms of public standing. More of ths stuff dragged out in court makes them all look stupid. Having the donators go to court and describe how they were seduced to give more money and the promise of weekend rides with Lance - seriously? that's a good thing? Most of them will say they don't want their money back - mark it down as a bad investment. Move on.

The Daily Mail comments section was indicative of this. Same set of circumsatnces 3 years ago that article wouldn't have even been printed.

How times have changed.

Only in America would there have been people stupid enough to have actually financed Floyd's defense campaign in the first place, let alone have believed in his innocence. It is incredible how naive and uncritical those people were, and presumptuous; in addition to exhibiting a kind of vapid patriotism that not only had blinded them to the truth, but reality itself, which they arrogantly presumed to know better than those much more seasoned into the ways of this sport and so were so easily hoodwinked. I mean it's one thing to cynically say its impossible for our hero be a doper, entirely another to voluntarily open one's wallet and in good faith contribute to the legal expenses of his defense.

If I were the State, rather than penalize Floyd, I'd fine all those citizens who willingly contributed to his scam, on grounds of the sheer arrogance and presumptuousness that was required to support what normal people knew to have be patently false and ridiculous. Neither is a crime, of course, but the combination of both among voting adults shows us where the real scandal (and problem) lies.

As to Lance, what can be said? His supporters lapse even further into a rather perverse mental debility. Whereas the grotesque spectacle of a justice system that is based solely on economic capacity and a persona that perpetuates a certain national myth of the "miraculous” guy who raises himself from the throws of death to invincibility (that we have tirelessly seen in just about every recent Hollywood blockbuster), exclusively on the wholesomeness of his character and the maniacal awesomeness of his work ethic, in professional cycling defies further comment.

Evidently Top Gun Lance is much more convenient to perpetuating the myth, which everyone wants to see (or believes they see, or is supposed to see); by contrast bad boy Floyd, who by the way has a very un-American caustic irony to his character, represents the one who draws the curtains back while the performance is on stage, exposing the behind the scenes reality that no one is meant to see. Which one do you think in the end goes down? Floyd's problem for the establishment was that he was condemned and confessed his crimes, but not Lance. Hence it is better to insolently commit crimes and protect the omertà, then it is to come clean and try to break it.

 

[rhubroma]

Very true.
Landis commited just about every offence that Armstrong is accused of.
Intimidation, perjury, fraud etc etc.

Crying about fairness should be reserved for those who are entitled to fairness.

Indeed just as all those who are to be held responsible for their crimes, are not entitled to avail themselves of money, fame and political support to alleviate them from it. Fairness doesn't seem to be at stake here, so much as the consistency of its application.

 

[rhubroma]

Good post buuuuutttttt.....

These guys weren't donating for Floyd's innocence. The Average Joes were but the Champions Club donators weren't supporting what they thought was an innocence man slated by a dodgy French justice system. They were furthering their advancement in the Lance club. That's the only reason they stumped up money. Not for Floyd but to further advance up the Armstrong weekend riding gang.

I agree with AG. Floyd needs to face the law like everyone else including Lance. But he has one thing on his side and he won't need expensive lawyers - truth. He doesn't have a problem with telling it like it is and he doesn't fear jail.

I honestly believe its a no win for Armstrong in terms of public standing. More of ths stuff dragged out in court makes them all look stupid. Having the donators go to court and describe how they were seduced to give more money and the promise of weekend rides with Lance - seriously? that's a good thing? Most of them will say they don't want their money back - mark it down as a bad investment. Move on.

The Daily Mail comments section was indicative of this. Same set of circumsatnces 3 years ago that article wouldn't have even been printed.

How times have changed.

So what your saying is that only the cynically motivated were among his backers. My impression was that they played a role, but mostly in preying upon the others, whose naiveté was sufficient to make them willing investors in the cause, and who represented the majority.

 

[thehog]

Indeed just as all those who are to be held responsible for their crimes, are not entitled to avail themselves of money, fame and political support to alleviate them from it. Fairness doesn't seem to be at stake here, so much as the consistency of its application.

I'm still fail to see where fraud took place. It was an investment not a racketeer. If people wish to invest in a defense that's their choice. If Floyd never admitted his doping then he wouldn't be under investigation. He still maintains he wasn't positive for testosterone so the money may not have been garnished under false pretenses. Beside it was the C.Club circle that pitched in the bulk and they weren't giving money to fight for American freedoms.

I'm actually laughing at the entire process. Unless there's something Floyd hasn't told us I'm not sure why any of Federal investigators would present the case. It fits under the small crimes local police type of issue does it not?

 

[thehog]

So what your saying is that only the cynically motivated were among his backers. My impression was that they played a role, but mostly in preying upon the others, whose naiveté was sufficient to make them willing investors in the cause, and who represented the majority.

I take your point. There were some Ma & Pa donators who threw in $100 here and there. But how is that different than the guy at the end of my street who has a stand and asking me to donate and buy books because the apocalypse is coming?

If the Feds think its worthy and want to take it to trial then so be it. If they push for conviction prior to trial I think they picked the wrong guy. Floyd will defend himself if he has to. In fact he'll enjoy it. He'll take on the government alone and probably win. He has one advantage and that he is not hiding the truth anymore. Armstrong had to pony up on the lawyer front because he didn't want to confess. Landis doesn't have that problem.

The guy has admitted his ills. Even said he'd pay back everyone if he had the money. The Feds can find him guilty force a sale on his house and track down all the investors and pay them back... great! When they're done with Flloyd they can get onto Wall St and make sure everyone gets their money back

 

[rhubroma]

I'm still fail to see where fraud took place. It was an investment not a racketeer. If people wish to invest in a defense that's their choice. If Floyd never admitted his doping then he wouldn't be under investigation. He still maintains he wasn't positive for testosterone so the money may not have been garnished under false pretenses. Beside it was the C.Club circle that pitched in the bulk and they weren't giving money to fight for American freedoms.

I'm actually laughing at the entire process. Unless there's something Floyd hasn't told us I'm not sure why any of Federal investigators would present the case. It fits under the small crimes local police type of issue does it not?

Well now I'm laughing along with you! For you fail to realize nobody has an personal responsiblity in America today. It's always someone else's fault. While there is always a lawyer ready at your back.

 

[Merckx index]

Like Hog, I really don’t understand where the fraud is. Fraud is when you solicit money for a stated purpose, and then use it for something else. Like a pyramid scheme, where the money goes to pay off earlier investors, or into the pocket of the scammer running it. Or an advertiser who claims a product will do something that it won’t in fact do. Or, ahem, hypothetically, someone who asks money for a charity and uses the money for something else.

Floyd didn’t do this. He asked for money so that he could defend himself against doping charges, and he used the money for that purpose and that purpose alone. I don’t see whether he lied or not about doping is relevant. Most people who are charged with a crime and are guilty of it lie about that. Just as politicians routinely lie to people donating to their campaign about what they will do when elected. People who donate money to a legal defense fund or to a political campaign have a right to know that the money will be used for defense or campaigning. They don’t have a right to expect a certain outcome of the defense or campaign.

I mean, what was Floyd supposed to do? If he confessed to doping, he literally would have no case. There would be no court proceedings at all. He could only defend himself by maintaining his innocence. Obviously, maintaining innocence does not mean one is innocent. It simply means someone has decided to fight the charges. Period. End of story. When Floyd told everyone he didn’t dope, he was saying the only thing he possibly could say if he wanted to exercise his legal right to defend himself. Anyone who read anything more into it than that is ignorant of not just human nature, but of the way the law works.

 

[rhubroma]

I really don’t understand where the fraud is. Fraud is when you solicit money for a stated purpose, and then use it for something else. Like a pyramid scheme, where the money goes to pay off earlier investors, or into the pocket of the scammer running it. Or an advertiser who claims a product will do something that it won’t in fact do. Or, ahem, hypothetically, someone who asks money for a charity and uses the money for something else.

Floyd didn’t do this. He asked for money so that he could defend himself against doping charges, and he used the money for that purpose and that purpose alone. I don’t see whether he lied or not about doping is relevant. Most people who are charged with a crime and are guilty of it lie about that. Just as politicians routinely lie to people donating to their campaign about what they will do when elected. People who donate money to a legal defense fund or to a political campaign have a right to know that the money will be used for defense or campaigning. They don’t have a right to expect a certain outcome of the defense or campaign.

I mean, what was Floyd supposed to do? If he confessed to doping, he literally would have no case. There would be no court proceedings at all. He could only defend himself by maintaining his innocence. Obviously, maintaining innocence does not mean one is innocent. It simply means someone has decided to fight the charges. Period. End of story. When Floyd told everyone he didn’t dope, he was saying the only thing he possibly could say if he wanted to exercise his legal right to defend himself. Anyone who read anything more into it than that is ignorant of not just human nature, but of the way the law works.

While your argument seems impecable, why, then, is he potentially being brought back to court over this?

 

[aphronesis]

Like Hog, I really don’t understand where the fraud is. Fraud is when you solicit money for a stated purpose, and then use it for something else. Like a pyramid scheme, where the money goes to pay off earlier investors, or into the pocket of the scammer running it. Or an advertiser who claims a product will do something that it won’t in fact do. Or, ahem, hypothetically, someone who asks money for a charity and uses the money for something else.

Floyd didn’t do this. He asked for money so that he could defend himself against doping charges, and he used the money for that purpose and that purpose alone. I don’t see whether he lied or not about doping is relevant. Most people who are charged with a crime and are guilty of it lie about that. Just as politicians routinely lie to people donating to their campaign about what they will do when elected. People who donate money to a legal defense fund or to a political campaign have a right to know that the money will be used for defense or campaigning. They don’t have a right to expect a certain outcome of the defense or campaign.

I mean, what was Floyd supposed to do? If he confessed to doping, he literally would have no case. There would be no court proceedings at all. He could only defend himself by maintaining his innocence. Obviously, maintaining innocence does not mean one is innocent. It simply means someone has decided to fight the charges. Period. End of story. When Floyd told everyone he didn’t dope, he was saying the only thing he possibly could say if he wanted to exercise his legal right to defend himself. Anyone who read anything more into it than that is ignorant of not just human nature, but of the way the law works.

A difference between this situation and one of your examples is that Floyd was not facing criminal charges. Didn't he also drag out the proceedings?

Similarly, politics, for the most part, don't activate a particular machinery already knowing a past outcome. (Sure, we could argue all kinds of cases in which that does happen, but no politicians admit to a priori deception.)

How the state chooses to waste its time and currency is its business.

In fact none of the parallels being invoked here really obtain--much as many would like them to. Cancer is a given. If you or anyone else says I want to fight cancer, help me out with this by donating some money, it's up to someone else to prove that the money is not being used for that purpose (which, despite all the (wo)man hours wasted in this forum, I doubt any of the most negative detractors have set about doing).

Floyd on the other hand named no cause, no negative, no fact, no condition other than his own innocence and said "help me benefit and gain by giving me some money to prove these institutions wrong."

Like as not, that is the textbook definition of fraud as I'm pretty sure Chris already said upthread. That Christianity or Catholicism got in on the act two millenia ago--and continues to do so--is really beside the point. Those organizations sidestep the issue by claiming a positive factor and advancing the well being of all those who tithe: proximity to god's beneficience instead of cancer (awareness) is the targeted object. When it goes wrong, you see the more reckless and outlying huckster clergy being taken down.

The salient distinction is that Floyd knew the facts in advance--or claims he did with the last revisions of his story--he gave up the positive (not that of the test in the tdf) by his own admission. That's far more clear cut than the opposite problematic of trying to prove a negative.